He said he was tipping his pitches. How on earth is that trying to shift blame elsewhere? It’s an explanation, not an excuse.
I agree, I see it more in the context of someone saying "I'm not living up to the expectations of my job, here's what I think I've been doing poorly and here's how I'm going to try to address it."
So what you're saying is if you know Randy Johnson is throwing his slider or Pedro is throwing his change, it really doesn't matter if he's tipping, because he is still getting you out. On the other hand, if a smoke and mirrors guy like Hill is tipping, yeah, he's going to get smoked?
Yes, and I realize that's not exactly a groundbreaking statement. It's just the reason why, while I acknowledge that Hill's pitch tipping statement is a valid explanation and not an excuse, I'm not necessarily taking it as predictive for him moving forward, we'll see. A quick look at the Savant page for that game shows that his curveball, which he threw 40% of the time, had an inch less vertical break and 3 inches less horizontal break compared to his yearly average. So one could also reasonably point to shittier stuff in that game too.
Triple A and major league balls are the same to start with as of a few years ago, lower levels use a different ball.
I can't say I'd be disappointed if he needed a week or two to get himself together.
It's going to be a tough stretch that as you say may make or break the team, but I'm hopeful and here's why. Leading up to that stretch there are 3 games at home with a struggling Detroit, 3 at Cleveland who is just 1/2 game better than Boston in the standings and three in Chicago vs the hapless Cubbies, so there's a fair chance that the team can pick up a few more games in the WC race. Now lets look at that July 4th to August 3rd schedule. As you say every game (27 of them) is against teams playing better than .500 baseball, but I see a bit more hope in that 7 of those games are against the Rays who are only a game and 1/2 up in the standings with another 4 vs Cleveland and 3 with Milwaukee who at 35-30 are just a half game better than Boston. They've got to actually play the games and play well, but roughly half of that stretch (14 of 27 games) is against teams that are similar in record to Boston.
If they're going to be a good team, they're going to have to beat good teams at some point. Bring it on.
How about we put that in baseball terms?
Well, the reason I didn't is precisely that we routinely underestimate the variance of baseball. There's a stubborn idea that the 2021 Astros almost always win and the Twins constantly lose... but this isn't how baseball works. Comparing it to a lower-variance sport helps put this in perspective.
And that variance is further exacerbated by the chance of catching a team at a "bad time" (Angels) or going up against Babe Finch (Ohtani).
How about we be a lot less lazy. Who is saying four extra losses in the next 24 games will "sink" us?
Well, two posters upthread referred to this stretch as the one that will "make or break us". And, in the How to get back in this thing thread, there's a reference to it as "the meatgrinder." (To be clear, nobody specifically said that 4 extra losses would make or break us-- my point here is that this stretch that some people view as decisive should only be expected to produce 4 extra losses relative to the easy stretch we just finished.)
Edit: I added opponent winning % per series, then divided by the number of series. But RR did the correct adjusted numbers (weighting for shorter and longer series) above and came to virtually same result for the "hard" stretch.
Fair enough. But your basic premise is still that the inner volatility of the Sox matters more than the quality of opponents?
Which is part of the reason that I asked about the aggregate of the opposing teams winning % during the "soft" part of the schedule. Was that taken previous to that stretch of games, before each series or at the end of the stretch. If it was the latter, the Sox had a profound effect on that.
I agree we haven’t mentioned the improved D much as it seems to have been more of an emphasis in team building than I thought. For example, it looks to be a conscious choice to use JBJ over Renfroe and not just a way to buy prospects. Also, it hadn’t really occurred to me that the improved D by X and Devers was somehow driven by Story…they both just seem to be making more plays.
Second best in AL in batting (runs scored). Third best in fielding. Fifth best in pitching (ERA).
I'm not sure how much stock to put in the ninth innings this weekend. The Cardinals are a really good hitting team. They're going to get to even good bullpens on occasion. At this point, they've got 3-4 guys who have emerged as fairly reliable guys: Houck, Schreiber, Strahm, Davis (Friday's outing not withstanding). And two or three who are replacement level who you can get by with most of the time if they're covering middle/late innings with a sizeable lead (or deficit). If you can upgrade one or two of those guys via trade, great. If not, there are still a couple internal options to explore before panic time arrives. One is Sale bumping one of the other starters to the pen. The other likely sooner option is Josh Taylor. He's supposed to being a rehab assignment this week, which could have him activated sometime next week.
I mean it's not just this weekend though, the Sox leads the majors in blown saves. The bats have been putting up significantly more run support than they were at the start of the season, but in tight games, these implosions are going to lead to losses.
Whitlock's future seems to be as a starter, but I think that Whitlock to the pen is a strong possibility as I think the team still has a innings limit in mind for him and he would fill the need they have for a strong right hander. If Taylor comes back and pitches as he did last year and Whitlock joins him in a month or so this would be a huge boost to what has been a season long puzzle. Six of the eight slots filled by Davis, Strahm and Taylor from the left and Whitlock, Houck, Schreiber from the right doesn't seem too shabby ATM. That's an awful lot or trust to place in guys without a ton of MLB experience, but to date they've all earned that trust. I'm guessing there's not much getting around Barnes getting one of the remaining two slot's and Paxton's return will displace someone. Odd man out ATM would be Hill.
Correction: they are #2 in MLB in blown saves, behind Tampa (15 to 14). They have just 5 blown saves (2-2 record) in their last 38 games (26-12). Blown saves is an inexact stat to begin with in terms of how well it measures anything, but most of their blown saves came in bunches when the team was struggling mightily in all phases. Since they've been in their winning ways, the pen has been pretty good overall just like the offense and starting pitching.
A lot of that has to be a function of playing so many games in April where the offense scored like 1-3 runs. If the offense is never adding on after they get a lead then the bullpen has to be perfect or they're going to end up with a blown save.
This is how the regular season in 2018 felt in reverse. NY started off 45-21 and ended up winning 100 games, but still lost the division by 8 games to BOS.
I’d take NY winning 108 and Boston winning 100 this season. As long as the playoffs work out a little differently.
Cora doesn't believe it either, so Bogaerts and Devers not starting tonight.
