The Sox are gonna have three of those and none of them will be named Mookie Betts. Think about that.When was the last time a team had 3 30 Hr 100 RBI .300 AVG plus guys and didnt make the playoffs?
The Sox are gonna have three of those and none of them will be named Mookie Betts. Think about that.When was the last time a team had 3 30 Hr 100 RBI .300 AVG plus guys and didnt make the playoffs?
2000 Houston Astros. Jeff Bagwell, Moises Alou and Richard Hildalgo all accomplished the feat and the team finished 72-90. It's also the most recent instance I could find of any team having three guys meeting that criteria in the same season.When was the last time a team had 3 30 Hr 100 RBI .300 AVG plus guys and didnt make the playoffs?
This is silly. This team could possibly get into the playoffs and go far without Chris Sale in the rotation.... the likelihood of them doing those goes up with Chris Sale in the rotation.4 games strikes me as the key September 1 number. 4 games back you have a workable shot; 6 is firmly in “need close to a sports minor miracle” territory. I’m glad they don’t have Sale right now. He’s too much of a deflater in my view. The expectations are so high with him—not rightfully so, I’d venture—and then, often enough, you get the big letdown with that thing you banked on. I think he’s bad for the collective psyche of a team like this. Get it to 3 games back on September 1 and we are really talking. Still, I think I they have no shot based on what I’ve seen this year. They function in spurts, not stretches. They need a sustained stretch now. There’s no wiggle room. Has to be now.
All are currently playing actually. A’s up 4-2 in 5th, Indians up 1-0 in 5th, Rays 0-0 in 2ndFor scoreboard watchers, and who isn't?, Tribe, As and Rays all playing this afternoon. Seems the best bet for a 1/2 game pick-up is probably from the Rays.
Sitting on 21 HR, so he has a chance, albeit a slim one, to get to 30. But at 67 RBI he's not no shot at 100 for the season.The Sox are gonna have three of those and none of them will be named Mookie Betts. Think about that.
I don’t mean to pile on or be a jerk — always a dangerous way to begin a post! — but I’m having a hard time understanding this attitude.Nice to root for the home team, but do you really want to see this pitching staff in the playoffs?
Well if they all keep up that winning pace, with the Sox keeping at 7-3 pace.....Well, the end of that isn't true, the Indians got swept by the Mets last week, the A's are 3-3 in their last 6 against SF/KC, and the Rays are circling the drain, 6-8 in their last 14.
Left out the 1953 Dodgers (Campanella, Hodges, Snider) that lost in the World Series to the Yanks and the 1929 Phillies (Don Hurst, Chuck Klein, Lefty O'Doul) who finished in 5th at 71-82. I automatically assumed it said 1929 A's and was wondering were Foxx and Simmons were (they both did hit those marks that year, but they were the only two on that team that year). And I had to look up Don Hurst.2000 Houston Astros. Jeff Bagwell, Moises Alou and Richard Hildalgo all accomplished the feat and the team finished 72-90. It's also the most recent instance I could find of any team having three guys meeting that criteria in the same season.
The time before that was the 1997 Rockies (Larry Walker, Vinny Castilla, Andres Galarraga) and that team finished 82-80 in third place.
The 1996 Rockies had FOUR players go 30-100-.300 (Castilla, Galarraga, Dante Bichette, Ellis Burks) and finished 81-81 in third place.
The 1996 Indians had three guys do it (Albert Belle, Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez) and finished 99-63 in first place. That would be the last (and only I believe) time a team had three 30-100-.300 guys and made the playoffs.
Seems like it's more common to do it and miss the playoffs than do it and make them.
getting swept on a day off is so 2019Welp. Cleveland, Tampa and Oakland all win by a 1-2 run margin. If the Sox are going to make a push, they’re going to need a little help and they’re certainly not getting any thus far.
I know we're getting a touch off topic, but why are you mad at Liam Hendricks? For saying how he feels about an NBA team?Liam Hendricks can eat a bowl of dicks.
Edit: A's squeak it out 9-8, Bubba Starling (who?) Ks to end it.
Sorry, just my GSW homerism bubbling up, mixed in with frustration over losing a half game (x 3) in the Wild Card chase. Apologies for the game-threading. I actually don't begrudge Hendriks the comments at all. Not sure how legitimate his specific gripe is, but I totally get the general resentment for the one-time fellow humble Oaklanders who have stepped in the limelight and left their blue collar roots behind.I know we're getting a touch off topic, but why are you mad at Liam Hendricks? For saying how he feels about an NBA team?
Did the Coliseum have a season (so far) without overflowing toilets? But the infield grass is beautiful, like a huge golf green, noticed while running around the bases with the grandkids after a game. Another likable aspect of the A’s is their manager Bob Melvin, who does a great job with what he has.Sorry, just my GSW homerism bubbling up, mixed in with frustration over losing a half game (x 3) in the Wild Card chase. Apologies for the game-threading. I actually don't begrudge Hendriks the comments at all. Not sure how legitimate his specific gripe is, but I totally get the general resentment for the one-time fellow humble Oaklanders who have stepped in the limelight and left their blue collar roots behind.
And actually, while I find it hard to be an A's fan (still too much PTSD from the beatings they put on us in the late '80s) I have nothing but respect for how they compete despite their financial disadvantages, and despite being the red-headed stepchild even in their own media market. If I had to pick between them and Tampa (do the Rays even have fans?) I'd take them all day. Cool team, cool colors, cool old stadium, last of the Mohicans in their big East Oakland parking lot.
All that said, ESPN still has the Sox this morning as a 7.5% playoff shot, basically the chance of Steph Curry missing a free throw, which I've certainly seen. Let's do this!
Owings could easily be removed from the 40 man roster. I'm not sure Joey Curletta or Denyi Reyes would be missed, eitherDalbec and Houck are not on the 40-man roster at present, and the roster is full, so them getting a call up doesn't seem likely. They've only got one player who they could shift to the 60-day IL to make a roster spot, and that's Wright. I think they have to leave Sale on the 10-day on the outside chance that they a) make the playoffs and b) he could potentially contribute out of the pen at that point.
Chavis seems the obvious add. If they're going to operate with a 4-man rotation plus a bullpen game, the more arms they have, the easier it will be. Velezquez, Poyner, Brewer, Shawaryn, Weber, Lakins, Kelley, Reyes should all be brought up as soon as they're no longer needed to play out the string in Pawtucket (or Portland in Reyes' case).
Isn't the proper term for this "excision"?Owings could easily be removed from the 40 man roster. I'm not sure Joey Curletta or Denyi Reyes would be missed, either
Ideal scenario for last night (8/30) would have been: Sox win, A's lose, Rays lose (Cleveland wins). Only one of those 4 happened. Sox still 5.5 games out. Important series, IMO, for the Sox to end up the weekend at 4.5 games out...3.5 out would be possible but unlikely.
I wouldn't call being within 4 games of the Rays as controlling their own destiny. Assuming each game is 50/50, there is a 1/16 probability of a sweep. That's why there has been only one team to comeback from 0-3 in postseason history.Why do you think it's preferable the Rays lose instead of win vs the Indians? The Sox play them 4 more times and the Rays also aren't currently in the playoffs like the A's and Indians. We need far less help to catch the Rays than the Indians or A's. The Sox are only half a game back from controlling their own destiny against the Rays. That's not the case against the A's and Indians. Am I missing something? We want the Rays to beat the Indians.
Controlling your own destiny means if you win, you advance, you lose you go home. The math behind it doesn't actually matter.I wouldn't call being within 4 games of the Rays as controlling their own destiny. Assuming each game is 50/50, there is a 1/16 probability of a sweep. That's why there has been only one team to comeback from 0-3 in postseason history.
That's true but it's really unlikely they sweep in Tampa. It does look like that's their best shot though, hoping Cleveland collapses while making up most of the ground with the Rays with a sweep. They need to play better against the Yankees for that to even matter.Controlling your own destiny means if you win, you advance, you lose you go home. The math behind it doesn't actually matter.
Yeah, I don't think it's very likely but I don't think the Sox making the playoffs is very likely. I think they are more likely to make the playoffs today than they were yesterday though and it's because the Rays won. Does anyone have the actual numbers?That's true but it's really unlikely they sweep in Tampa. It does look like that's their best shot though, hoping Cleveland collapses while making up most of the ground with the Rays with a sweep. They need to play better against the Yankees for that to even matter.
One thing to watch is that Cleveland plays the Nats at the end of the season. You need those games to count for Wash.
It's still a long shot. The Sox are likely to have a Porcello start and a bullpen game. And Ed-Rod is hardly a lock and who knows about Price. Just one win by the Rays will result in a gain of only 2 games.Controlling your own destiny means if you win, you advance, you lose you go home. The math behind it doesn't actually matter.
edit: Right now if the Sox win out and the Rays win the rest of their games except vs the Redsox, they finish tied. The Sox need the Indians and A's to lose games to other teams. It is not in the Sox hands.
ESPN's odds has it at 6.9%. Regardless it's very much a long shot, especially with two teams to pass.Yeah, I don't think it's very likely but I don't think the Sox making the playoffs is very likely. I think they are more likely to make the playoffs today than they were yesterday though and it's because the Rays won. Does anyone have the actual numbers?
Everyone understands it's a long shot. But when you play against a team in front of you, at least you have the opportunity to control your own destiny relative to that team.It's still a long shot. The Sox are likely to have a Porcello start and a bullpen game. And Ed-Rod is hardly a lock and who knows about Price. Just one win by the Rays will result in a gain of only 2 games.
2017 the hitting didn't show up, 2019 the pitching didn't show up.I don’t expect playoffs but I am appreciating that they are finishing up the year playing strong. So many wasted games this year that they don’t belong in the playoffs at all. It’s obvious they’re incredibly talented, they’ve just often played with the malaise of a team that just won it all.
But some of the offensive performances show that last year wasn’t necessarily a fluke.
It’s usually one or the other, especially on a game to game level.2017 the hitting didn't show up, 2019 the pitching didn't show up.
I dunno.... I guess I was thinking that Cleveland was going to be a lock for the WC so that our competition for the 2nd spot was Oakland and Tampa. Ideally I'd just want all 3 to lose, but in this scenario I was assuming Cleveland was in. Now I'm not so sure... I guess the true ideal scenario for when two teams you're competing against are playing each other would be a long, drawn out 18 inning marathon with a rain-out and rescheduling.Why do you think it's preferable the Rays lose instead of win vs the Indians? The Sox play them 4 more times and the Rays also aren't currently in the playoffs like the A's and Indians. We need far less help to catch the Rays than the Indians or A's. The Sox are only half a game back from controlling their own destiny against the Rays. That's not the case against the A's and Indians. Am I missing something? We want the Rays to beat the Indians.
Good flyer for at least rotation depth for next season. Prior to this season, he had two back to back pretty good years (sub 4.00 ERA, >180 IP) with a few other decent ones scattered around some crappy ones. He looks like an Andrew Cashner with more potential at a fraction of the cost, with some slightly more upside. So nothing like Andrew Cashner is what I mean.Jhoulys Chacin and Champagne!
Source confirms: Red Sox have a minor-league deal with righty Jhoulys Chacin.
I feel dirty. And it don't wash off easily.The Yankees win! Whut? Rooting for those clowns is never easy. Necessary evil.
Sub-4.00 ERA, 180+ IP is a really good year, especially the 3.50, 192 IP season in Milwaukee.Good flyer for at least rotation depth for next season. Prior to this season, he had two back to back pretty good years (sub 4.00 ERA, >180 IP) with a few other decent ones scattered around some crappy ones. He looks like an Andrew Cashner with more potential at a fraction of the cost, with some slightly more upside. So nothing like Andrew Cashner is what I mean.
After this series, none of those 3 teams play each other so we can just root for all of them to lose. If TB holds on and the Sox win tonight, the Sox will be 5 back of Cleveland and 4.5 back of Oakland and TB. I think that's much better than 7.0 games back of Cleveland, 4.5 back of Oakland and 2.5 back of a TB team that currently isn't even int the playoffs.I dunno.... I guess I was thinking that Cleveland was going to be a lock for the WC so that our competition for the 2nd spot was Oakland and Tampa. Ideally I'd just want all 3 to lose, but in this scenario I was assuming Cleveland was in. Now I'm not so sure... I guess the true ideal scenario for when two teams you're competing against are playing each other would be a long, drawn out 18 inning marathon with a rain-out and rescheduling.
As far as who I'd rather play against in a WC game on the road, between Cleveland, Tampa and Oakland... assuming all teams are somehow able to set up their rotation.... it'd probably be Oakland, Tampa then Cleveland..... so I don't know what I'm talking about.
We can't afford to lose any games that are winnable late, like last night, especially against a sub-500 team. Our backs are against the wall. It's now or never. We need to be like a cornered rat, or a woman lifting a car to prevent her kid from being crushed. I suppose last night Cora had some cockamamie reason after the game for bunting with Benny with first and second nobody out. He had a perfect setup: good left hand hitter against a right hand pitcher. Get'em over or get'em in. I suppose the matchups did look good with Moreland and Brock coming up. For once we got a good bunt but nothing but fail after that. That kind of season but we can't afford to lose any games that have been set up like last night.Oakland loses. Cleveland loses. Great.... and the Red Sox implode with a chance to get to 4.5 back. Could have been worse I guess... if they can at least take the series against the Angels, and have the same outcomes as yesterday for Oakland, Tampa/Cleveland then they'll still be in good shape.*
IMO they really need to be < 5 games back by the end of this set of series.
*4.5 back with 26 remaining.... not really good shape.... but basically the Sox have them right where they planned...... Price, returning from injury scheduled to start today... an exhausted bullpen.... exactly where they want them.....