Any chance Whitlock keeps the spot? It’s not like anyone is being asked to go more than 5 innings as a starter anyway, you could keep him under 150 for the season if that’s a concern.
Red Sox in season discussion
- Thread starter Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat
- Start date
I doubt it. IMO I'd rather someone hand the ball of to him than entrust his lead to someone else for 4 innings. The Sox are likely to try to keep his innings at a certain count this season. I think we see the majority of his appearances out of the pen with some spot starts and perhaps a spot in the rotation later in the year if needed. He only threw 73.1 innings last year and I think they they have an eye at increasing that some this year and then perhaps the training wheels come of next season.
The Red Sox will need more starter depth in Toronto. (Mods move / delete if needed, wasn't sure where to put)
View: https://twitter.com/byJulianMack/status/1515717387374501893?s=20&t=27ziNMZmzyXkNB4FFl4dSQ
View: https://twitter.com/byJulianMack/status/1515717387374501893?s=20&t=27ziNMZmzyXkNB4FFl4dSQ
I don't think it does show everyone that -- if we've learned anything over the last few years, it's that it's a mistake for the media to assume readers will draw a clear conclusion like "and that's wrong" or "and he's obviously contradicting himself" when presented with statements like this from public figures. It would be preferable for the report to underline that the whole story is that he is not, in fact, doing anything he can to help his team win.
I'd have liked to see at least a "Although he vows to do everything he can to help the team, he wont bee allowed to pitch in because . . . . ."
I hope he is tested daily otherwise he should not be in the Red Sox clubhouse, no? I was starting to like this guy.
This was announced a few weeks ago when MLB made their Sunday deal with Apple+ public.Very quietly the Red Sox have changed the start time of the May 8th game against the White Sox to 11:35 AM and will be seen on NBC and Peacock.
In fact if your downloaded the schedule from the Sox site a month or so ago, the time of game was TBD.
I'd like see him completely pilloried in the media, and booed roundly in the stands, for his selfish idiocy,. But I doubt there will be much of that. Most will, I suspect, respect his "private decision".
A follow-up comment along the lines of:
"Everything to help your team except getting vaccinated... What else WON'T you do to help the team? Choosing to miss starts is pretty bad for the team." Would not have been out of line imo.
That might be why I'm not a jock sniffing sports writer.
As the Blue Jays play more home games it will be interesting to see what other teams have this issue.
Seems like kind of an advantage for Toronto. Incremental but the division could be pretty tight.
Seems like kind of an advantage for Toronto. Incremental but the division could be pretty tight.
No, they definitely shouldn’t. These morons should have “UNVACCINATED” sewn on the back of their jerseys instead of their name.
It could be an advantage, but of course, they had to play the first 2/3 of their season away from home last year, and all of it the year before.
if I was a Blue Jays fan, and finished one game out of the playoffs in a season like that, I’d be pretty chapped.
Anyone else surprised when Wacha was pulled today? Only 79 pitches, and it seemed like he was cruising.
4.1 ip on 72 pitches in his last outing. It looks like they're stretching him out slowly. Maybe they let him go close to 90 next time?
I wish guys like this were ostracized by their teammates and coaches but we know they aren’t. It’s the one thing that might actually move the needle.
I bet the Jays wins over this year because of this. I think it's worth, I dunno, 3 or 4 extra wins over 81 games in the Tdot.
Probably better off in Views..... but given the above comments.
I know laws are laws, but I am surprised all the vitriol is reserved for the unvaccinated players and not also the requirement (IMO - neither positions make complete sense). The Canadian law makes no exception for a player who has had a documented case or two of Covid. It has been shown by several studies that Delta infection is as protective as the vaccine and previous OMicron infection is significantly more protective than 1 shot (regardless of mRNA or J&J single shot). So really to make any sense, the requirement should be either 2 vaccinations or 2 documented infections or 1 + 1.
I know laws are laws, but I am surprised all the vitriol is reserved for the unvaccinated players and not also the requirement (IMO - neither positions make complete sense). The Canadian law makes no exception for a player who has had a documented case or two of Covid. It has been shown by several studies that Delta infection is as protective as the vaccine and previous OMicron infection is significantly more protective than 1 shot (regardless of mRNA or J&J single shot). So really to make any sense, the requirement should be either 2 vaccinations or 2 documented infections or 1 + 1.
Perhaps people are also reacting to other things being unvaccinated is associated with, and not just this particular millionare player's hypocrisy.
Maybe, but then you'll get millionaire athletes paying for fake certificates that indicate they had already had Covid (a la Novax Djokovic). Much better to have a simple policy that applies the same way to everyone. It was one thing when vaccines were new and not easy to get everywhere, but now there's really no excuse except selfishness (not just in baseball terms but also in putting the vulnerable in society at risk). Also amazing to me that the same people who claim "personal choice" in endangering their fellow citizens seem to be those that are aghast at people kneeling at anthems.
How many people, athletes or not, have had covid based on a home test who never had it "documented" as well? If for example, Houck had covid last November but he never saw a doc is the Canadian gov't supposed to just take his word for it? Canada's policy is what it is at this point and I don't really see any way you can start carving out exceptions.
Honestly it's kind of professional malpractice that none of the reporters present offered a follow-up question of "So, who else can't play."
Nope, that's not how it works. He of course has every legal right not to get vaccinated. And he has every right not to under the CBA. But unless he chooses to reveal a legit(and exceedingly rare) medical reason for not getting it, fans, media, teammates, and anyone else invested in the team are well within their bounds to assume he's refusing to get it out of selfishness, ignorance, or both. And to be extremely, vocally, critical of him for willfully putting his team at a competitive disadvantage. As I said in my first post, my guess is that won't happen in any prolonged or meaningful way. But he, and whoever the other players are, would deserve every once of scorn that could be heaped upon them.
This is going to be a very difficult ball club to spend money on and root for this year, unless these fucking morons see the light at some point. Why should we invest in/care about their season, when apparently several of them don't. I'm hoping against hope that this blows up into a big, distracting, embarrassing story for the franchise. Maybe that spurs these idiots to grow up and get the vaxx.
Agreed that they will be hard to root for if this goes on. Why should fans care about winning any games in Toronto if guys like Houck (and whoever else won't be making the trip) don't? It's a personal decision to not get vaccinated like it's a personal decision to hit your throwing hand with a hammer the day before you pitch. Sure, it's your right to do what you want with your body, but it's pretty dumb and hurts the team.
Just a reminder to keep this thread about the baseball consequences of multiple players not being able to travel to Toronto. No one has crossed the politics line yet, but this will heat up starting tomorrow.
The exact opposite of this is also true. People want to force a vaccine on people but are quick to spout personal choice on other things. The fact that many people are having heart issues is a good reason to question the vacccine. I they work so well, If you are vaccinated why care if others aren't.
I saw in the ESPN article that players on the COVID restricted list arent paid and don't accrue service time, but I'm a little unclear on the roster rules - does the restricted list effectively work like a short term IL? And the sox can call up players for that series only?
The myocarditis risk is far higher from getting covid than the vaccine (ask Eddie Rodriguez, who missed all of 2020 due to that exact issue): https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/01/myocarditis-risk-higher-after-covid-infection-than-vaccination-cdc-finds.html
Ok so here's my take on the unvaxxed. Like many of you I dislike this. Yes it hurts the team, especially an A.L. East team that is scheduled to play 10 games in Toronto including the next to the last series of the season. That said, this isn't exclusively a Red Sox thing. Every team playing in Toronto this season will face the same prospect of traveling to Canada without antivaxxers that they are counting on to contribute to their team's success. As stated previously, these player have the right and it is sanctioned by both the league and the union. If it was purely an issue with Boston players I might view it differently. I don't like it, but I can't get worked up over it.
You are probably correct that most teams will have to travel to Toronto without one or more players over their vaccine mandate. But the Red Sox didn't have to go to Toronto with an artificial competitive disadvantage just because other teams were. If the Yankees jumped off a bridge...
I'll get worked up about it because it is and was so easily avoidable. To flip your point, the fact that other teams will miss players makes this something of a missed opportunity for the Red Sox. They could have theoretically had a leg up on the rest of the league playing in Toronto if guys like Houck and whoever else would have gotten vaccinated and the whole team could make the trip.
Edit: "didn't"/"were"
Last edited:
Morons because they have different views than you? Very respectful and inclusive thinking on your part.
If this, in my opinion, ridiculously over-the-top Canadian restriction is still in place in September, it will be absolutely absurd and I hope the object of scorn switches to the restriction. For the time being I share in everyone's frustration with Houck and others decisions, when they knew it would have this impact.
Ignoring their (objectively wrong, less a legit medical reason) "different views" is one thing, but these anti-vax actions actively affect and harm the teams competitiveness. Why should any fan of the Sox respect the decision of a player(s) that only has the ability to harm the club?
