Yes because all thumb surgery is the same. Also I am not sure when Bailey will ever pick up a bat again,..
I bet you felt silly when you finished scrolling down and saw my most recent post. But thank you for pointing out the obvious.
Yo! You're not logged in. Why am I seeing this ad?
Posted 03 April 2012 - 09:00 AM
Yes because all thumb surgery is the same. Also I am not sure when Bailey will ever pick up a bat again,..
Posted 03 April 2012 - 09:53 AM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 09:56 AM
Aceves bounceback ability would be one reason to use him as a closer. I could see Bobby using Aceves as a more than 1 inning closer as the situation dictated. He could mix and match Morales and Melancon in the set-up role based on match-ups, and have Aceves available to clean up any messes in the 8th, and then pitch the 9th. I would be a lot more confident in Aceves cleaning up after Melancon, than the other way around.Isn't Aceves greatest skill his rubber arm, his ability to throw 3 innings one day, and still pitch the next day? If he's to be used as a closer, he'll pitch a lot fewer innings, who picks those up?
I'm shocked no one has mentioned the dreaded "bullpen by committee", or talked about a trade for K-Rod.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:26 AM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:55 AM
Ravech just tweeted that if Bailey needs surgery, he'll be out three months.
This front office has been such a collection of fail the last four years its scary
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:56 AM
Using Padilla's most recent season starting in Los Angeles and EV's formula, Padilla comes out right in the range of Melancon and Aceves. Plus, Padilla was 3-3 in save opps for LA last September (someone keeps saying the opposite, but he was healthy to end the season). So, maybe Padilla gets the 2- and 3-run 9th inning holds.
Or, my less reasoned reaction is, after reading about how unreliable all the other options are after adjustiong for luck and karma, "Ben, Roy Oswalt on line 2."
Posted 03 April 2012 - 10:58 AM
Because they should have known that he'd be involved in a freak ST collision and unable to pitch.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:02 AM
Edited by SoxScout, 03 April 2012 - 11:02 AM.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:02 AM
Show me where he hits his thumb in that collision. There is no way that is how he got hurt.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:04 AM
Ravech just tweeted that if Bailey needs surgery, he'll be out three months.
This front office has been such a collection of fail the last four years its scary
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:09 AM
Here's a theory: when they acquired Beckett, there were serious concerns about the soundness of this shoulder. Whoever did the deal decided he was worth the risk and it worked out extremely well. Since then, they've repeatedly acquired pitchers with similarly troubling injury histories, claiming that the Sox had a best-in-class way of promoting pitcher health (I'm thinking of Aceves, Jenks, Lackey, Bedard and Bailey). These aren't pitchers that have typical wear-and-tear, they're pitchers with well-established injury concerns. I wonder if the FO got lucky with Beckett (and Aceves, for that matter) and now feels comfortable rolling the dice on pitchers with questionable health. Perhaps that approach should be reconsidered, at least when paying a high price for pitcher acquisitions (i.e,. Jenks, Lackey and Bailey).
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:14 AM
This front office has been such a collection of fail the last four years its scary
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:15 AM
Two sources tell the Globe that Beckett was cleared to pitch on Monday by Dr. Mark Bagg, a specialist in Texas. The visit to Dr. Graham is simply a precaution. Barring the unexpected, Beckett will start against the Tigers on Friday.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:17 AM
Actually, I wouldn't quite throw Lackey in there either. The concerns regarding Lackey were around his degrading rate stats, but he had been pretty damn durable in his career up to the point where the Sox signed him. And in his first year here he made 33 starts and threw 215 innings. It all came apart last year as the injury badly affected his stuff, but it's not like this guy was missing a dozen or more starts each year. The miss on Lackey was one of quality, not injury history.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:25 AM
If injury history wasn't a concern, how do you explain the 2015 ML minimum clause? Just because a guy hasn't missed significant time yet, that doesn't mean he isn't considered a risk to.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:27 AM
If injury history wasn't a concern, how do you explain the 2015 ML minimum clause? Just because a guy hasn't missed significant time yet, that doesn't mean he isn't considered a risk to.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:36 AM
I suspect it was a protection clause, since the eternal truth is that all pitchers get hurt.
His actual track record was pretty good in terms of staying healthy.
Edited by Bucknahs Bum Ankle, 03 April 2012 - 11:38 AM.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:40 AM
Lackey averaged 33 GS and about 210 IP from 2002 - 2007. Then in 2008 he dropped to 24 GS and 163.1 IP as he missed the first 41 games of the season due to triceps tendinitis. In 2009 he had 27 GS and 171.1 IP as he missed the first 34 games of the season with elbow tightness. I recall being mildly concerned about this at the time he was acquired.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:41 AM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:52 AM
Gordon Edes
VBobby V tells reporters that Bailey will be out a while, does not say who his closer will be, cuz hasnt spoken to player
Posted 03 April 2012 - 11:54 AM
https://twitter.com/#!/MikeSilvermanBB/status/187219647706304512Bailey out for what sounds like months
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:00 PM
I am not trying to blame it on ineptitude at all. I think it's a cover-up not incompetence.Unless he was hurt at the time of the trade there is no reason we can blame this on FO ineptitude.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:04 PM
Actually, I wouldn't quite throw Lackey in there either. The concerns regarding Lackey were around his degrading rate stats, but he had been pretty damn durable in his career up to the point where the Sox signed him. And in his first year here he made 33 starts and threw 215 innings. It all came apart last year as the injury badly affected his stuff, but it's not like this guy was missing a dozen or more starts each year. The miss on Lackey was one of quality, not injury history.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:10 PM
Not true.
Bucknah's Bum Ankle detailed the history of elbow issues in Anaheim, but I'm also not sure how you think you can analytically separate quality from health. Even if you believe the questionable assertion that Lackey's poor performance in 2011 is totally unrelated to the elbow surgery he's had since, I can't see what possible evidence you could have to support that.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:17 PM
MikeSilvermanBB
Cherington on Bailey: Won't be available Opening Day, no update from Cleveland yet, not a bone injury
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:18 PM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:27 PM
https://twitter.com/#!/Sean_McAdam/status/187229374225981440Told that if Andrew Bailey does need surgery, it's expected he would miss three to four months
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:29 PM
Edited by Carl Everetts Therapist, 03 April 2012 - 12:33 PM.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:42 PM
I really don't understand this at all. Why is there so much optimism about a guy with a 4.54 xFIP through 240 big league innings, mostly as a reliever? Even if you believe his low HR/FB is sustainable, his career FIP is 4.08. Matt Cain is the poster child for suppressed BABIP and HR/FB, and even with his ridiculously low career BABIP of .265, his career ERA has only outpaced his FIP by 0.34. Basically what I'm saying is even if you think Aceves can maintain his HR/FB of 7.2%, and can suppress BABIP as well as Matt Cain, it's difficult to project him below a 3.75 ERA. And unfortunately, I don't think there is any reason to believe he can do either of those things based on only 240 IP.
It seems that the biggest argument for BABIP suppression being a skill is that certain guys have the ability to induce weak contact. Isn't it logical to expect a guy who can induce weak contact to also be able to miss bats in general? This is why SIERA adjusts ERA down for guys with high K rates; if you miss bats, you probably also give up weaker contact and thus have a slightly lower BABIP.
Aceves lacks the high K rate, and his career SIERA (which also adjusts down for relievers) is 4.02.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:46 PM
I know it's blasphemous, but a few of us watch the games and watch Aceves as a person as opposed to a line of numbers. Numbers tell quite a bit, but not everything.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:51 PM
I hope it doesn't hurt too much when I tell you that WE ALL watch the games and watch Aceves as a person and the simple reality is that the numbers tell the truth and your eyes and your impressions will lie to you repeatedly.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:52 PM
How can you blame the front office whatsoever when the next most likely option at closer was to sign FA Ryan Madson? Look where he is right now..... I prefer Bailey's thumb to Madson's elbow.
Of course there are people who in hindsight say they should have re-signed Paps, but that Philly contract is batshit crazy money and the sox netted two draft picks. So I'd still let Paps walk even in hindsight...
I think you give Bard a month to see if he can be a top line starter if by May he's struggling/worse than average you call up Cook to start and slide Bard in as closer.... Till then you make due with Morales, Aceves, Melancon whoever has the hot hand.
Andrew Bailey's injury is troubling, no doubt. But the Cardinals won the World Series last season with Jason Motte as their closer. You know how many career saves he had at this point last season? Three.
Edited by HillysLastWalk, 03 April 2012 - 12:53 PM.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 12:55 PM
How can you blame the front office whatsoever when the next most likely option at closer was to sign FA Ryan Madson? Look where he is right now..... I prefer Bailey's thumb to Madson's elbow.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:00 PM
False dichotomy. They could have handed Melancon the job, used Scutaro and the guys they traded for Bailey for a better-quality arm (closer or otherwise) without Bailey's injury history, or just picked a random current reliever and dubbed him the "closer."
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:07 PM
Is this thumb injury at all related to his previous injury history? Seems like nothing more than shit luck to me.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:17 PM
I wouldn't throw Bedard into that group, given he was acquired for very little for a stretch run and as a short-timer. And given that the Sox were deciding between Bedard and Harden, it appears they made the right choice in that case.
Actually, I wouldn't quite throw Lackey in there either. The concerns regarding Lackey were around his degrading rate stats, but he had been pretty damn durable in his career up to the point where the Sox signed him. And in his first year here he made 33 starts and threw 215 innings. It all came apart last year as the injury badly affected his stuff, but it's not like this guy was missing a dozen or more starts each year. The miss on Lackey was one of quality, not injury history.
Lackey said he pitched in pain for two years.
Edited by Laser Show, 03 April 2012 - 01:20 PM.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:19 PM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:19 PM
Seriously, though -- there is an I'm-with-stupid story out there which I hope never comes out.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 01:30 PM
Is this thumb injury at all related to his previous injury history? Seems like nothing more than shit luck to me.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 02:00 PM
I don't have time to look for the quote, but I distinctly remember reading on Extra Bases last month that Lackey said the elbow had been hurting for two years.
I think I posted it on here at some point, but I'll look around again later.
EDIT: That was easy. Found it:
Posted 03 April 2012 - 02:20 PM
http://www.weei.com/...ved-involve-ucl
According to a major league source, the injury sustained by Andrew Bailey is believed to involve the UCL (ulnar collateral ligament) in the pitcher's thumb.
Mets closer Francisco Rodriguez was sidelined by a UCL injury in August, 2010, missing the remainder of the season after undergoing surgery. Red Sox catcher Jarrod Saltalamacchia also experienced the ailment, and subsequent procedure, leading into the offseason following the '10 season.
“We think he suffered when he was in a collision at Bradenton when he covered first and collided with Alex Presley and he fell," Red Sox general manager Ben Cherington told reporters Tuesday afternoon in Washington, D.C.
"At the time he didn’t think anything of it but then started to experience some soreness shortly after that and then went back and looked at the video and he definitely landed on his thumb so he’s never had any thumb soreness before that so we don’t know for sure but it seems possible that’s what did it. Anytime you have more of an acute injury, we have to get to the bottom of how bad it is and whether it can be managed conservatively or not."
Posted 03 April 2012 - 02:24 PM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 02:27 PM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:15 PM
I know it's blasphemous, but a few of us watch the games and watch Aceves as a person as opposed to a line of numbers. Numbers tell quite a bit, but not everything.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 03:18 PM
But, let me point out the difference. This year, going forward, there are two wild-card teams that have to play a one game playoff. In other words, a couple of extra blown games that happen now, in April or May or whatever, could lead to a wild-card slot as opposed to a division title.
Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:15 PM
https://twitter.com/#!/ScottLauber/status/187301642851450880
#RedSox announce Andrew Bailey will have surgery Wed. in Cleveland to reconstruct ulnar collateral ligament in his right thumb
Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:19 PM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:22 PM
Posted 03 April 2012 - 05:29 PM
But Bedard had little to no chance of giving them what the needed*- due to fairly obvious concerns about his durability. Meanwhile guys like Bruce Chen and Brett Myers** - lesser talents who had more chance of completing the season - didn't appear to attract the Sox. In that sense it seems to fit withI wouldn't throw Bedard into that group, given he was acquired for very little for a stretch run and as a short-timer. And given that the Sox were deciding between Bedard and Harden, it appears they made the right choice in that case.
941827 point in that the Bedard case is another recent example of the Sox being willing to roll the dice on durability...Edited by kazuneko, 03 April 2012 - 05:32 PM.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users