1275 replies to this topic

[Sprowl]

I fail to see how leaving Lester in a game rather than going to the worst bullpen in baseball can be a mistake. If Thomas can't get a righthanded hitter out as well as Matt Albers, why is he in camp, let alone on the team.

Lester had already thrown 102 pitches in seven innings, gave up three loud outs in the 7th, and was beginning to have trouble hitting his spots. It's early in the spring, the pitchers are not fully stretched out, the relievers are well rested, and Albers in particular has only thrown 15 pitches, all in one game.

Thomas is a left-handed pitcher with a traditional platoon split. He gives right-handed batters an easy look at the ball, he throws the ball up in the zone, and he gives up flyballs and line drives. He's a LOOGY who failed to get the LHB, and then got left in past his shelf life.

Matt Albers is a right-handed pitcher with a traditional platoon split. He keeps the ball down better than Thomas, has a record of getting groundballs, and is tough on RHB.


It was a no-brainer.

[Pumpsie]

Lester had already thrown 102 pitches in seven innings, gave up three loud outs in the 7th, and was beginning to have trouble hitting his spots. It's early in the spring, the pitchers are not fully stretched out, the relievers are well rested, and Albers in particular has only thrown 15 pitches, all in one game.

Thomas is a left-handed pitcher with a traditional platoon split. He gives right-handed batters an easy look at the ball, he throws the ball up in the zone, and he gives up flyballs and line drives. He's a LOOGY who failed to get the LHB, and then got left in past his shelf life.

Matt Albers is a right-handed pitcher with a traditional platoon split. He keeps the ball down better than Thomas, has a record of getting groundballs, and is tough on RHB.


It was a no-brainer.

And Valentine said exactly THIS after the game, admitting his mistake in not going to Albers when the bases got loaded. He said he was "hoping" that Thomas' change-up would get a groundball (for a DP) when he should have gone with Albers' sinkers. I think we can all agree on this.

[Dogman2]

And Valentine said exactly THIS after the game, admitting his mistake in not going to Albers when the bases got loaded. He said he was "hoping" that Thomas' change-up would get a groundball (for a DP) when he should have gone with Albers' sinkers. I think we can all agree on this.

I think you are mixing up the games. Lester threw a complete game yesterday (Wednesday) and Thomas was brought in on Tuesday night in a 3-1 game.

[Plympton91]

And Valentine said exactly THIS after the game, admitting his mistake in not going to Albers when the bases got loaded. He said he was "hoping" that Thomas' change-up would get a groundball (for a DP) when he should have gone with Albers' sinkers. I think we can all agree on this.

That's all well and good, but there were no outs and then there was another lefthander up next. So, even if we assume that Albers, who was cut by the Orioles, sucked the whole second half of last year, sucked in spring training, and has only thrown 15 pitches in a 2 weeks, got the righty out, who pitches to the lefty? Do you go to Morales in the 6th, then burn through your two available decent middle relievers, who are masquerading as relief aces, in a game you're losing?

Ben Cherington's guy blew a tie game and a save against the Tigers. Beckett and Buchholz gave up 7 runs and only one starter has made it out of the 6th inning.

Whether Fatt Albers or Justin Thomas pitched to a righty is about the 200th most important thing that happened in the first 6 games.

[Plympton91]

So you'd rather toss out a decade of sabermetric data and bet on the side of a 33-year-old Nick Punto having made a real and sustainable jump last year, because Bobby V thinks he sees something?

Why do you assume it's because "Bobby V thinks he sees something," instead of something Punto told Cherington, which was the impetus behind giving a 33-year-old, seemingly light-hitting middle infielder a two-year guaranteed contract?. Your bias is on full display. If it is a mistake to take some signal out of Punto's improved offense, then your problem is as much with Cherington as with Bobby V.

Because Lester was gassed (although I will certainly stipulate that knowing when a SP is done is almost impossible for any manager), and despite the "worst pen in baseball" meaningless rhetoric, there were arms in the pen available at that time that have gotten results this year.

Lester gave up one run and finished the inning. The evidence is not on your side.

Because in the AL, particularly the AL East, playing for one run is stupid unless to tie/win a game in the very late innings. The psychological advantages come when you beat the snot out of a team with a 7-run inning.

You must be mistaking this for 2003 or 2004. This lineup features Mark Sweeney, Cody Ross, Jarrod Saltalamacchia, and Mike Aviles. Playing for 7 runs with that crowd of outmakers is fools gold.

[rembrat]

Whether Fatt Albers or Justin Thomas pitched to a righty is about the 200th most important thing that happened in the first 6 games.

If you can't get why Justin Thomas being left to pitch as if he weren't a LOOGY in a close spot is important, especially in this topic, then you should just hang up your membership here. Go troll on 4chan or something.

[yecul]

But he prefers trolling all you fine marks, I mean people.

[Pumpsie]

I think you are mixing up the games. Lester threw a complete game yesterday (Wednesday) and Thomas was brought in on Tuesday night in a 3-1 game.

Yes, I most certainly am. I'm talking about the Tuesday game and Sprowl was talking about last night's game. The only thing they had in common was that Albers name was mentioned re: both. I'm going to take some Gingko Biloba now and see if I can regain some memory.

[Plympton91]

If you can't get why Justin Thomas being left to pitch as if he weren't a LOOGY in a close spot is important, especially in this topic, then you should just hang up your membership here. Go troll on 4chan or something.

What I'm argiuing is that you had 3 choices:

Let Thomas face a righty and then a lefty.
Lwt Albers face a right and then a lefty.

In each of those cases you have a bad platoon split for at least one batter. Or

Let Albers face the righty, and then bring in Morales to face the lefty, in the 6th inning.

None of those are attractive options to me. Given that they're still holding open try outs for the bullpen and 5th spot in the rotation, letting Thomas continue in that spot doesn't seem like the worst idea.

[rembrat]

Let Albers face the righty, and then bring in Morales to face the lefty, in the 6th inning.

That's perfectly fine. The point of carrying 8 relievers is so the manager can go apeshit getting the platoon advantage. What inning he does it in should not matter. What matters is recognizing the game is on the line and acting accordingly. Shit, yesterday's game was lost in the 3rd inning for crying out loud.

[Sprowl]

What I'm argiuing is that you had 3 choices:

Let Thomas face a righty and then a lefty.
Lwt Albers face a right and then a lefty.

In each of those cases you have a bad platoon split for at least one batter. Or

Let Albers face the righty, and then bring in Morales to face the lefty, in the 6th inning.

None of those are attractive options to me. Given that they're still holding open try outs for the bullpen and 5th spot in the rotation, letting Thomas continue in that spot doesn't seem like the worst idea.

The two choices, both acceptable, are

1) Thomas as a LOOGY, Albers for one RHB, Morales for the full following inning;
2) Morales instead of Thomas, planning on Morales facing LRL.

I prefer #2, since it would be a reasonably high leverage deployment of the bullpen's best reliever so far, and the matchup is favorable.

Bobby V chose #1, but didn't follow through.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Doesn't all this demonstrate the total pointlessness of having a guy like Thomas on the team? If he can't face a righty in the 6th inning without all hell breaking loose, how useful can he really be? Wouldn't the Sox be better off with a competent big league reliever and a bench bat as opposed to Thomas and Michael "won't pitch him in a close game but won't release him" Bowden? The fact that Franklin Morales, a guy nobody was talking about two weeks ago, is now considered a top reliever kind of says it all. Get well soon, Rich Hill.

[Plympton91]

The two choices, both acceptable, are

1) Thomas as a LOOGY, Albers for one RHB, Morales for the full following inning;
2) Morales instead of Thomas, planning on Morales facing LRL.

I prefer #2, since it would be a reasonably high leverage deployment of the bullpen's best reliever so far, and the matchup is favorable.

Bobby V chose #1, but didn't follow through.

So, Morales has been the best reliever thus far, and both you and rembrant say he should have been used in the 6th inning of a game the Red Sox were losing 3-1? Thus, if the same situation presented itself in April 2011, you would both be absolute fuming that Francona hadn't used Bard in that situation--down 3-1 in the 6th--right?

Get a grip. Your beef is with the GMs and ownership that is tolerating this bullpen.

Rudy has it exactly right. Get well soon Rich Hill--with your 11 innings of major league relief in the past half decade and surgically repaired elbow--if I'd just woken up from a 10 year nap I'd swear Dan Duqueete took over the Red Sox and not the Orioles.

[Sprowl]

So, Morales has been the best reliever thus far, and both you and rembrant say he should have been used in the 6th inning of a game the Red Sox were losing 3-1? Thus, if the same situation presented itself in April 2011, you would both be absolute fuming that Francona hadn't used Bard in that situation--down 3-1 in the 6th--right?

Get a grip. Your beef is with the GMs and ownership that is tolerating this bullpen.

Rudy has it exactly right. Get well soon Rich Hill--with your 11 innings of major league relief in the past half decade and surgically repaired elbow--if I'd just woken up from a 10 year nap I'd swear Dan Duqueete took over the Red Sox and not the Orioles.

Melancon and Aceves were available for traditional setup and closer roles, if the team could keep it close. Morales didn't need to be saved, he needed a chance to make a difference. He had not pitched since 4/8, and had shown the best combination of velocity, variety and command of any of the team's relievers.

As rem says, 13 pitchers means that the manager can go full-Maddon, especially when there is reason to think that they might offer a real platoon advantage. Bobby the Fifth recognized as much in the post-mortem, but got swayed in the moment by Hope.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Speaking of Joe Maddon...is anyone aware that on 4/6/12, the Rays had runners on 1st and 2nd with nobody out, down 6-5, and Sean Rodriguez...SACRIFICED.

[Harry Hooper]

Speaking of Joe Maddon...is anyone aware that on 4/6/12, the Rays had runners on 1st and 2nd with nobody out, down 6-5, and Sean Rodriguez...SACRIFICED.

ESPN recap says it was 1st and 3rd with nobody out, but the Rays didn't score in any event.

[Toe Nash]

Speaking of Joe Maddon...is anyone aware that on 4/6/12, the Rays had runners on 1st and 2nd with nobody out, down 6-5, and Sean Rodriguez...SACRIFICED.

It wasn't a straight sacrifice, it was a safety squeeze that failed. The pitch was too low and Rodriguez just topped it into the ground in front of the plate, so Longoria couldn't come home.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Melancon and Aceves were available for traditional setup and closer roles, if the team could keep it close. Morales didn't need to be saved, he needed a chance to make a difference. He had not pitched since 4/8, and had shown the best combination of velocity, variety and command of any of the team's relievers.

As rem says, 13 pitchers means that the manager can go full-Maddon, especially when there is reason to think that they might offer a real platoon advantage. Bobby the Fifth recognized as much in the post-mortem, but got swayed in the moment by Hope.

With 13 pitchers on the staff there was no earthly reason not to use the pen, and use it heavily, in Wed's game. Valentine screwed up by leaving a tired Lester in there to hang a pitch that was hit to drive in an insurance run.

If you're not going to go all matchup crazy with the relievers why on earth carry so goddamn many of them? Cut a couple and get an extra bench guy or two if that's the case.

[trekfan55]

What bothers me a little is that BobbyV apparently still does not know how to use the 13 pitchers he has. That's the impression I got, and I know BobbyV is a smart baseball guy.

[Plympton91]

With 13 pitchers on the staff there was no earthly reason not to use the pen, and use it heavily, in Wed's game. Valentine screwed up by leaving a tired Lester in there to hang a pitch that was hit to drive in an insurance run.

If you're not going to go all matchup crazy with the relievers why on earth carry so goddamn many of them? Cut a couple and get an extra bench guy or two if that's the case.

You think it's Valentine's decision to go with 13 relievers, rather than the front office's long-standing disinclination to expose those guys to waivers at the end of spring training? They can't distinquish between the last 4 guys on the depth chart, they have no real depth behind them, and so the 3 man bench is designed to protect as many as possible until they see if any one of them can get hot.

[Pumpsie]

You think it's Valentine's decision to go with 13 relievers, rather than the front office's long-standing disinclination to expose those guys to waivers at the end of spring training? They can't distinquish between the last 4 guys on the depth chart, they have no real depth behind them, and so the 3 man bench is designed to protect as many as possible until they see if any one of them can get hot.

Exactomundo. We go through a version of this almost every year. I hope things sort themselves out quickly, though. A three-man bench is brutal.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

You think it's Valentine's decision to go with 13 relievers, rather than the front office's long-standing disinclination to expose those guys to waivers at the end of spring training? They can't distinquish between the last 4 guys on the depth chart, they have no real depth behind them, and so the 3 man bench is designed to protect as many as possible until they see if any one of them can get hot.

Absolutely it's Valentine's decision. We saw for years that the FO catered to Tito and gave him 12 pitchers when he requested it. By all means if Valentine didn't want all these pitchers and preferred another bench guy instead, that's what he'd get.

And whose decision it is misses the entire point anyway. He's got 13 friggin' pitchers, there's no excuse to leave a starter in too long since he has the arms necessary to mix and match.

[Rudy Pemberton]

Absolutely it's Valentine's decision. We saw for years that the FO catered to Tito and gave him 12 pitchers when he requested it. By all means if Valentine didn't want all these pitchers and preferred another bench guy instead, that's what he'd get.

How many pitchers would the front office carry if they weren't constantly undermined by the managers they hire? I've been reading on here for years about how questionable moves are always to appease a manager (whether it's a LOOGY, a defensive minded 1B, etc) but where's the evidence? The idea that the front office is super smart and the manager a real dummy seems to persist no matter who those people are.

[Plympton91]

And whose decision it is misses the entire point anyway. He's got 13 friggin' pitchers, there's no excuse to leave a starter in too long since he has the arms necessary to mix and match.

This is an argument to use a horrible righthander instead of a horrible lefthander. The fact is that 6 of the 8 pitchers he has in the bullpen have been released or DFA'ed in the past 24 months, a 7th that missed most of last year with an injury, and an 8th with less than 2 full seasons of effective pitching in an inferior league. If necessary, I'd have brought Lester back for the 9th.

[Sprowl]

This is an argument to use a horrible righthander instead of a horrible lefthander...

... and it's a good argument, since the Sox have plenty of horrible righthanders.

[Pumpsie]

Absolutely it's Valentine's decision. We saw for years that the FO catered to Tito and gave him 12 pitchers when he requested it. By all means if Valentine didn't want all these pitchers and preferred another bench guy instead, that's what he'd get.

And whose decision it is misses the entire point anyway. He's got 13 friggin' pitchers, there's no excuse to leave a starter in too long since he has the arms necessary to mix and match.

Absolutely it isn't. The assessment that management wants to keep as much pitching around as long as possible to see what they have, and to be able to protect themselves against an early pitching injury, is the correct one. It's just amazing that the people who want us to believe that Bobby Valentine is the kind of manager who likes to over-manage will also hamstring himself by only carrying three bench players, thereby limiting his options. We'll have four bench players again when the Sox figure out what they have at the end of the bullpen.

The Blaming Bobby thread continues to reach new heights of incoherence and absurdity. This thread should be changed to "The Damned if You Do, Damned if You Don't" thread.

[CaptainLaddie]

I'm watching the Zen of Bobby V on ESPNC right now it's pretty interesting. It makes me like him more than I already do.

[Plympton91]

Bobby V once again makes the right decision about whether to steal an inning with a pitcher up against his limits. It was not a no brainer to leave Buchholz in to pitch the 7th today approaching 100 pitches. And the decision to take him out for the 8th despite the easy 7th was also a decision point. In both cases, I thought the right decision was made. It was important to let Buchholz continue to build on the positive momentum he had established and get over 100 pitches; but at that point, the confidence gained wasn't worth risking in the 8th, as the 3-run lead covers the uncertainty anytime one of the Red Sox relievers comes in.

Also, could someone explain to me how the Sainted Joe Maddon's decision to allow Howell--after he'd allowed 3 consecutive runners to reach base--to pitch to lefty-killer Ross with the bases loaded and down only 1 run is any different from Valentine's decision earlier this week not to go to a lefty-on-lefty matchup? In this case, Maddon was thinking that Salty was up next, and he'd want him facing a lefthander. So, as Valentine was doing, he hoped to get lucky in the "bad" matchup to not end up using 3 pitchers for 3 batters.

Edited by Plympton91, 14 April 2012 - 07:19 PM.

[JimBoSox9]

Going into the 7th Clay was under 100 and let up 1 run over the previous 5. That's the definition of a no-brainer without a lights-out 7/8/9 combo.

[Buzzkill Pauley]

Also, could someone explain to me how the Sainted Joe Maddon's decision to allow Howell--after he'd allowed 3 consecutive runners to reach base--to pitch to lefty-killer Ross with the bases loaded and down only 1 run is any different from Valentine's decision earlier this week not to go to a lefty-on-lefty matchup? In this case, Maddon was thinking that Salty was up next, and he'd want him facing a lefthander. So, as Valentine was doing, he hoped to get lucky in the "bad" matchup to not end up using 3 pitchers for 3 batters.

Maybe it was something more like this:

Rays Bullpen RHP = Rodney, Peralta, Davis, Badenhop, De la Rosa

Rays Bullpen RHP used 4/14 = Badenhop (25 pitches)
Rays Bullpen RHP used 4/13 = Peralta (21), Davis (41), Badenhop (17)
Rays Bullpen RHP used 4/12 = Peralta (14), Davis (18)

Davis was clearly unavailable, and Peralta appears to have been, as well. Badenhop had already been used. That leaves your closer (Rodney) and the guy you just recalled from AAA (De la Rosa) as the only RHP options left.

So Maddon's four options for this mid-April game were:

• use his closer when down one run in the 8th inning;
• pitch Peralta three days in a row (with 8 more games to follow);
• throw the kid into the chum-filled water as the Sox circle; and
• stick with Howell or swap to another LHP and hope for the best.

Getting Price out of the game early yesterday -- such that Davis had to throw 3 IP and Peralta couldn't even get one out -- paved the way for today's late-inning onslaught.

[Smiling Joe Hesketh]

Absolutely it isn't. The assessment that management wants to keep as much pitching around as long as possible to see what they have, and to be able to protect themselves against an early pitching injury, is the correct one. It's just amazing that the people who want us to believe that Bobby Valentine is the kind of manager who likes to over-manage will also hamstring himself by only carrying three bench players, thereby limiting his options. We'll have four bench players again when the Sox figure out what they have at the end of the bullpen.

This is nonsense. They have 13 pitchers because that's what the manager asked for, and just like in the Tito years the FO rather sensibly gave him that. This was freely admitted by all parties when Tito was here.There's not much point in brawling it out over such stuff.

Again, the original issue was that despite having a billion pitchers in the pen a starter was left in too long in the game and gave up an insurance run despite obvious signs of being tired beforehand. Despite 13 pitchers on the staff, and despite an off day the next day. That's the height of absurdity.

For once let me get off this silly topic and get on to something else: Valentine certainly seems to know the fielding past of his players as he immediately put Ross in center after Ellsbury's injury instead of McDonald, thankfully.

[Skiponzo]

Bobby V once again makes the right decision about whether to steal an inning with a pitcher up against his limits. It was not a no brainer to leave Buchholz in to pitch the 7th today approaching 100 pitches.

FTR I loved Tito...but I am 99% certain that he would have removed Buch at that point and that situation was one of the 1% choices where I didn't love him. Good choice by Bobby the Fifth.

[Plympton91]

This is nonsense. They have 13 pitchers because that's what the manager asked for, and just like in the Tito years the FO rather sensibly gave him that. This was freely admitted by all parties when Tito was here.There's not much point in brawling it out over such stuff.

Again, the original issue was that despite having a billion pitchers in the pen a starter was left in too long in the game and gave up an insurance run despite obvious signs of being tired beforehand. Despite 13 pitchers on the staff, and despite an off day the next day. That's the height of absurdity.

For once let me get off this silly topic and get on to something else: Valentine certainly seems to know the fielding past of his players as he immediately put Ross in center after Ellsbury's injury instead of McDonald, thankfully.

Just one more angle on this, before leaving it. I guarantee you Francona would have left him in, too. In a close game where one of his top starters was pitching well but on the losing end, Francona regularly let them go out and try to pitch another inning in order to give them the chance to get the win if the Red Sox came back to take the lead.

[TheoShmeo]

Just one more angle on this, before leaving it. I guarantee you Francona would have left him in, too. In a close game where one of his top starters was pitching well but on the losing end, Francona regularly let them go out and try to pitch another inning in order to give them the chance to get the win if the Red Sox came back to take the lead.

I agree that he routinely did that from about May 1 onwards. But I'm not so sure about the first several starts of the season.

[Pumpsie]

I agree that he routinely did that from about May 1 onwards. But I'm not so sure about the first several starts of the season.

We're splitting hairs here about this going one more inning thing and now Bowden is DFA'd and Spears and Repko are up, so we have the traditional 12 pitchers again. Again, the 13 pitchers was a temporary move to see a few of the marginal relievers a bit more. Justin Thomas is still there but Andrew Miller and Rich Hill will be joining the team in the near future as well and that'll be it for him. This front office has, usually, used the first month of the season as an extension of Spring Training before setting the roster on May 1st. And it's happening again.

[TheoShmeo]

We're splitting hairs here about this going one more inning thing and now Bowden is DFA'd and Spears and Repko are up, so we have the traditional 12 pitchers again. Again, the 13 pitchers was a temporary move to see a few of the marginal relievers a bit more. Justin Thomas is still there but Andrew Miller and Rich Hill will be joining the team in the near future as well and that'll be it for him. This front office has, usually, used the first month of the season as an extension of Spring Training before setting the roster on May 1st. And it's happening again.

I had no problem with how Clay was used. I was just pointing out that Tito was less apt to extend guys in search of a win or a few more outs early in the season. A side point in the conversation, if you will.

[JMDurron]

I realize that this bullpen is not exactly settled yet, that Atchison ended up doing nothing to make anyone feel better about it, AND that Francona probably would have done the same thing, but I thought that it was stupid to let Doubront start the 6th inning today. He was giving up rockets to everyone in the 5th inning, and he has not had any special dominance against LHH (reverse split, as has been posted in here repeatedly before) to justify letting him face a power-hitting LHH in Luke Scott. Atchison would obviously also be a bad idea against Scott, but that strikes me as what Justin Thomas is on the team for - to be the lefty in the pen who can be used "early" in the game without sacrificing Morales. If Thomas is going to be used at all (and I won't shed any tears if he's not, mind you), that's exactly when he should be used.

Edited by JMDurron, 15 April 2012 - 03:21 PM.

[Carl Everetts Therapist]

Holly huge ball of crap guys! the sox have just beat arguably the best rotation in the AL 3 straight and you're still finding knits to pick with Bobby V's managing?


The bandwagon is all gassed up, why don't you all come on board for the big win. He has an infectious smile, he's agressive and he spends the entirety of most games with both hands down the front of his pants. Give in, just go with the flow, it's so much less work just to enjoy a little unorthadox-ness.....

[JakeRae]

I think we finally have a plausible explanation for what was going on with the 13 pitchers situation. With Bowden being the first to go, I think the best explanation is that Bobby V wanted a 2nd lefty for the pen and that pushed Thomas onto the roster. Adding Thomas meant either carrying 13 pitchers or cutting Bowden and Cherington wanted to postpone cutting Bowden. Thus, 13 pitchers. I'm guessing that if Cherington completely had his way, Thomas wouldn't have made the team and if Bobby V had completely had his way, Bowden wouldn't have made the team. While I have no real basis for this proposed explanation outside of Bowden being the first casualty of the game of bullpen musical chairs that is just now getting started, it makes more sense than assuming that anyone actually thought it made sense to carry 13 pitchers.

I'm not completely sold on Bobby V managing the offense, but I like what I've seen from him on the pitching front so far. He hasn't been perfect, but he's made generally good decisions and his only huge mistake he freely admitted was one after the game. Also, with Ellsbury out, I will not rail against Punto batting leadoff if it happens from time to time. While I think Sweeney is a better fit, I don't think the difference between Punto, Aviles, and Sweeney as lead off hitters is sufficient to worry about. When Crawford gets back, I hope Bobby Valentine offers him a choice between hitting lead off or 7th and sees which one he picks. Even better, a Crawford/Aviles 1st/9th platoon would be pretty great.

[Sprowl]

I'm not completely sold on Bobby V managing the offense, but I like what I've seen from him on the pitching front so far. He hasn't been perfect, but he's made generally good decisions and his only huge mistake he freely admitted was one after the game. Also, with Ellsbury out, I will not rail against Punto batting leadoff if it happens from time to time. While I think Sweeney is a better fit, I don't think the difference between Punto, Aviles, and Sweeney as lead off hitters is sufficient to worry about. When Crawford gets back, I hope Bobby Valentine offers him a choice between hitting lead off or 7th and sees which one he picks. Even better, a Crawford/Aviles 1st/9th platoon would be pretty great.

Bobby's call on the new leadoff hitter seems to be working out pretty well so far.


edit: also, the entire team has been very patient against tough Tampa Bay starters. They didn't chase pitches against David Price, eventually wore him down, and got into the bullpen. They got Hellickson and Moore throwing many, many pitches. If the entire team does it, then credit probably should go to the hitting coach and manager.

[Savin Hillbilly]

Here's a good example of what makes the new kid in town new. Tito would never, ever have said this:

"You know the story would be that Jacoby would have caught the first ball that was hit in right-center," Valentine said. "Rep didn't, so I'm glad that's not the story. That he didn't make a good catch and that we can score runs without [Ellsbury is the story] -- and hopefully we'll score more runs when he gets back."

Lots of us on the game thread were thinking the same thing on that missed dive -- Jacoby would have had it, and might not even have had to leave his feet for it -- but what do you gain by saying it?

[Clears Cleaver]

Here's a good example of what makes the new kid in town new. Tito would never, ever have said this:



Lots of us on the game thread were thinking the same thing on that missed dive -- Jacoby would have had it, and might not even have had to leave his feet for it -- but what do you gain by saying it?

I was thinking Lin would have had it. LOL. Agreed, stupid thing to say

[The Boomer]

I tried to find it on the web without success but on today's broadcast they mentioned that the Sox had already scored more runs in 3 games against Tampa Bay than they scored all of last season. Can somebody access that? It's a small sample size but, even with Ellsbury and Crawford contributing little to nothing, they have been an offensive juggernaut at home. Maybe it's the lack of bloating for this beer and fried chicken deprived team.

[Rudy Pemberton]

It sounds to me like Bobby is simply saying that if the Sox lose, people (the media) would be blaming the loss on not having Ellsbury, that they can't replace him. That they are winning without him suggests its a team game and they can withstand the loss. Now, maybe it's more sinister than that and Valentine really was ripping Repko. But he's not Tito, and we should all get used to that.

[Savin Hillbilly]

I tried to find it on the web without success but on today's broadcast they mentioned that the Sox had already scored more runs in 3 games against Tampa Bay than they scored in home games vs. TB all of last season.

Correct with the bolded insert. They scored 26 runs in 9 home games vs. TB last year, have scored 31 in 3 after today's game.

[Savin Hillbilly]

It sounds to me like Bobby is simply saying that if the Sox lose, people (the media) would be blaming the loss on not having Ellsbury, that they can't replace him. That they are winning without him suggests its a team game and they can withstand the loss. Now, maybe it's more sinister than that and Valentine really was ripping Repko. But he's not Tito, and we should all get used to that.

I don't think there's anything "sinister" about it. Bobby wasn't intent on ripping Repko, he was just thinking out loud. It's just that Tito had pretty powerful and effective internal filters when it came to ripping his players to the press. He was good at stopping short of that without leaving obvious skid marks. Bobby, obviously, not so much.

[Red(s)HawksFan]

I tried to find it on the web without success but on today's broadcast they mentioned that the Sox had already scored more runs in 3 games against Tampa Bay than they scored all of last season. Can somebody access that? It's a small sample size but, even with Ellsbury and Crawford contributing little to nothing, they have been an offensive juggernaut at home. Maybe it's the lack of bloating for this beer and fried chicken deprived team.

They scored 57 runs in 18 games against Tampa last year, 26 of those in the 9 games at Fenway. So if what they meant was that the Sox have scored more runs against Tampa at Fenway so far than they did all of last year, then they are correct.

[Buckner's Boots]

When things are going well, as they are now, my only real criticisms of Bobby are highly superficial: I don't like the way Bobby says things, and I don't like his voice. Both of those things I can live with, as long as things are going well.

[JMDurron]

Holly huge ball of crap guys! the sox have just beat arguably the best rotation in the AL 3 straight and you're still finding knits to pick with Bobby V's managing?


The bandwagon is all gassed up, why don't you all come on board for the big win. He has an infectious smile, he's agressive and he spends the entirety of most games with both hands down the front of his pants. Give in, just go with the flow, it's so much less work just to enjoy a little unorthadox-ness.....

1) Not everyone who finds moves to criticize is a Valentine hater, I've been generally positive on his tactical moves so far, and I even said that the previous manager would have done the same thing in this case
2) The Red Sox had not won the game yet when I posted that, it was 5-4 at the time.
3) A bad move is a bad move, whether the game is won or not.

[Buckner's Boots]

What the hell just happened to this thread? It locked, then it re-opened with three missing pages. It's like the Watergate tapes or something.