How will the Sox do in 2020?

[simplicio]

Okay? You're maybe 5 years late with that but noted.

 

[streeter88]

Here are the differences between this lineup and the one that won 119 games two years ago:

1. A promising young hitter has replaced a superstar.
2. At 2B, Michael Chavis and Jose Peraza will be vying to replace the titanic production of Brock Holt + the corpses of Eduardo Nunez and Ian Kinsler. (Tall order, eh?)
3. Their primary catcher has improved at the plate, while their backup is merely a bad hitter, as opposed to an epochally bad one.
4. They have an actual 4th outfielder.
5. Everybody is two years older, but there will still be only 3 guys over 30 in the likely default lineup, same as in 2018.

The starting pitching and the MLB-ready minor league talent gap--those are legit worries. But there's nothing really wrong with the lineup. It's not as good, of course, without Mookie, but if there are "holes throughout" it, then there were in 2018 as well.

I think this post is great - thorough, optimistic, and full of good reasons why the Sox could win more than they lose and perhaps even contend for a WC.

And I picked the 85-89 win range that was the most popular option in this poll.

But I worry about the team chemistry - with such a popular player leaving, and not being replaced by someone with the same infectious energy anddrive - that this team could be prone to losing winnable games and big losing streaks. Especially starting off under the microscope of the cheating scandal punishment and fallout.

Then again, last year’s team underperformed with Mookie on it but that was mainly due to poor results from our starters.

So I guess I shouldn’t be worried - hah who am I kidding?

 

[Savin Hillbilly]

I think this post is great - thorough, optimistic, and full of good reasons why the Sox could win more than they lose and perhaps even contend for a WC.

Thanks. I realized, though, that I left out one important difference--the blossoming of Devers. The difference between 2018 and 2020 Devers could go a long way toward making up the difference between 2018 Betts and 2020 Verdugo.

But I worry about the team chemistry - with such a popular player leaving, and not being replaced by someone with the same infectious energy anddrive - that this team could be prone to losing winnable games and big losing streaks.

Yeah, I worry about the effect of losing Holt too.

I kid, I kid -- but "energy and drive" don't only come from one guy, and they don't necessarily have to come in ways that are obvious to fans.

 

[Plympton91]

I voted 89-95. It's all down to the pitching. They'll go as far as Sale, Rodriguez, Eovaldi, Perez, and the openers can take them. And if those guys stay healthy, I'm optimistic about how far the team can go.

I'm baffled that anyone thinks the offense is going to be a problem. Unless a couple key guys get hurt and don't play much at all, they've got a fairly potent lineup. They averaged 5.5 runs a game last year and the only significant loss is Betts. I suspect that better seasons from Benintendi and Bradley combined with a reasonably decent season out of Verdugo should make the net loss of Betts rather small.

You’ve pinpointed why I’m pessimistic. We don’t know who it will be, but people will get hurt. And, there is no depth at all in the lineup or the rotation.

 

[Plympton91]

Cole has been a top three MLB pitcher precisely once in his career, and is most likely never going to be as good again. Paxton has been elite once in his career. . . it was three years ago and he’s now an injured 31-year-old. And rather than draw any conclusions from Jordan Montgomery’s 4 innings of spring training, I’m just going to go ahead and laugh at the notion that “Montgomery looks great so far” means anything.

I suppose with the addition Cole then, sure, it’s obviously true that the Yankees rotation looks better on paper than it did last year. But lest we forget, the Yankees significantly outplayed their true talent level last year, too.

I’ll have what s/he’s having.

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

I think they're a .500 team with a lot of 7-5 games at the end of the year, for and against. They should score a lot of runs. But I don't see where they don't also give up a lot of runs.

ERod should be good. I think his injury days are behind him. I'll even grant Sale is back to "good," and gets maybe 25 starts with a couple of late-career Pedro weeks off mid-summer. But I can't see Eovaldi staying healthy. And after that it's just dreck as far as the eye can see.

They're talking 1-2 openers per time through the rotation? Maybe it can work, but it seems like you burn through arms that way. If they make the playoffs, it's because they did some straight-up wizard shit with the pitching staff.

 

[DeadlySplitter]

that this team could be prone to losing winnable games and big losing streaks. Especially starting off under the microscope of the cheating scandal punishment and fallout.

the 2019 Sox were exactly this with the same cast as 2018. the starters are the main reason for underperformance statistically, but they could have salvaged quite a few games with one big hit and, inexplicably, never got it

 

[Plympton91]

I think they're a .500 team with a lot of 7-5 games at the end of the year, for and against. They should score a lot of runs. But I don't see where they don't also give up a lot of runs.

ERod should be good. I think his injury days are behind him. I'll even grant Sale is back to "good," and gets maybe 25 starts with a couple of late-career Pedro weeks off mid-summer. But I can't see Eovaldi staying healthy. And after that it's just dreck as far as the eye can see.

They're talking 1-2 openers per time through the rotation? Maybe it can work, but it seems like you burn through arms that way. If they make the playoffs, it's because they did some straight-up wizard shit with the pitching staff.

Yeah, who are the Jalen Beeks’ and Ryan Yarborough’s that are coming in after the openers?

 

[judyb]

fwiw edro sounds really dumb as a nickname

imo

It's fun because the position he plays is sometimes abbreviated as P.