The issue I see is that they don't have a reliable lefty, necessarily. Taylor's absence hurts. But yes - Whitlock, Houck, Braiser, Robles (they way they've been pitching lately) looks pretty good. Interesting to see who else makes the roster from the 'pen...4 good BP arms and a starter being used on their side session day is better than most teams had up until recently.
That said… starters going less than 5- especially in the playoffs- Sox will need Otto, Sawamura, Perez and Richards to step up.
What’s the status with Taylor?
He is injured. Lots of reports in the media about his potential return, so not sure if you are asking something deeper here?What's the story with Josh Taylor?
The trade deadline didn't really end up being much of a difference maker for anyone. Exactly one AL team made the post-season that wasn't in such a position at the deadline, the Yankees, and it's arguable that they were good enough to pull it out without their deadline acquisitions.Exactly. Now if they had won a couple more vs the MFY maybe they’d be playing the Jays instead. But you could argue they are better off playing the MFY anyway. So whatever. The deadline really didn’t end up mattering from that perspective.
Right, I was just addressing the narrative that the Sox blew the deadline. Unless anyone thought they were going to win 100 games - which as a reminder they've done precisely once since any of us have been alive - then they were destined for a WC spot regardless of deadline moves.The trade deadline didn't really end up being much of a difference maker for anyone. Exactly one AL team made the post-season that wasn't in such a position at the deadline, the Yankees, and it's arguable that they were good enough to pull it out without their deadline acquisitions.
AL post-season teams on July 30 (ordered by wins): HOU, BOS, TB, CWS, OAK
AL post-season teams on Oct 4 (ordered by wins): TB, HOU, CWS, BOS, NYY
But perhaps not destined to lose to the Yankees tomorrow or in the ALDS or whatever. Picking up Steve Pierce in the middle of the 2018 season surely had little ultimate impact on our regular season finish (8 games ahead of the Yankees), but he sure proved useful in winning the World Series.Right, I was just addressing the narrative that the Sox blew the deadline. Unless anyone thought they were going to win 100 games - which as a reminder they've done precisely once since any of us have been alive - then they were destined for a WC spot regardless of deadline moves.
It’s true, but the alternative is likely facing a Toronto team that I think most analysts would agree is at least better on paper than the MFY. Of course the uniform seems to matter. We’ll see tomorrow.But perhaps not destined to lose to the Yankees tomorrow or in the ALDS or whatever. Picking up Steve Pierce in the middle of the 2018 season surely had little ultimate impact on our regular season finish (8 games ahead of the Yankees), but he sure proved useful in winning the World Series.
Somehow conspiring to keep Toronto at home really was the best thing for all the other AL East teams that made it through.It’s true, but the alternative is likely facing a Toronto team that I think most analysts would agree is at least better on paper than the MFY. Of course the uniform seems to matter. We’ll see tomorrow.
Right, I was just addressing the narrative that the Sox blew the deadline. Unless anyone thought they were going to win 100 games - which as a reminder they've done precisely once since any of us have been alive - then they were destined for a WC spot regardless of deadline moves.
Kind of. The Sox went 4-9 against Tampa down the stretch. That would have needed to flip to 8-5 for the Sox to tie them at 96 wins. You can play this what if game all day and if the Sox lost the division by 2-3 games I’d agree with you. But they lost by 8.Well... as much as I thought that Bloom did what we could with what he had in the farm system, the only thing is that the Sox winning percentage against anyone in the AL East not named Baltimore was abysmal. The Sox were battling for the number one record in the majors in July. They may not have won 100 games, but they wouldn't have needed to as TB, NY, and Toronto would have won less had the Sox been more competitive in August and September.
This is true though it really feels like the team is more than just needing that piece to put it over the edge when I look at the other teams in the running.But perhaps not destined to lose to the Yankees tomorrow or in the ALDS or whatever. Picking up Steve Pierce in the middle of the 2018 season surely had little ultimate impact on our regular season finish (8 games ahead of the Yankees), but he sure proved useful in winning the World Series.
The Jays and Sox were 28-29 vs the three others.Well... as much as I thought that Bloom did what we could with what he had in the farm system, the only thing is that the Sox winning percentage against anyone in the AL East not named Baltimore was abysmal. The Sox were battling for the number one record in the majors in July. They may not have won 100 games, but they wouldn't have needed to as TB, NY, and Toronto would have won less had the Sox been more competitive in August and September.
This year has really been a Rorschach test, hasn't it?Kind of. The Sox went 4-9 against Tampa down the stretch. That would have needed to flip to 8-5 for the Sox to tie them at 96 wins. You can play this what if game all day and if the Sox lost the division by 2-3 games I’d agree with you. But they lost by 8.
Speaking of hot takes, Schwarber hasn't hit 12 HR in 10 games for a while. I think he's due. He'll start with two tonight.We're a good team. We have more talent now than we did at the beginning of the season (Sale, Houck, Schwarber). Those three are a big infusion of talent. We'll be competitive against the Rays, assuming we get through the wild card game. That's my hot take.
Right, I agree with this - maybe. I agree that 92 wins wasn't best case. I also don't think 100 wins was reasonable. Where they were on July 27, I think 95-98 wins was probably the upper case in wins, and as you note, it didn't all have to come against the Rays. So it's possible that an extra deadline acquisition would have been the difference. It's also possible that it still wouldn't have been enough to win the division and they'd be in the same place they are today - hosting the WC game.This year has really been a Rorschach test, hasn't it?
If they sox win 3 more games against TB of those 13 you mention, that brings TB to 97 and the Sox 95. But they don't have to make up the entire 8 game difference all against the Rays ... If they win 3 there, then, they would have needed two more against other teams, to tie at 97. Given where they were on July 27 (2 games in first, second best record in the majors behind SF), getting to 97 wins was certainly very possible.
Damn, the COVID outbreak alone cost them a couple games.
Waiting for Schwarber and Sale (and Houck), banged up a bit, the team cratered between end of July and Mid August.Then there was a flurry when they joined and then the outbreak (it was probably the under-the-radar feat of the season that they played .500 ball through all the COVID absences. HERE, Cora deserves credit).
I don't see 92 wins as the best case scenario, from where they stood July 27. It's somewhere in the middle. Some regression to the mean was probable. But bad luck with injuries, COVID, some fatal managerial decisions (pulling Pivetta early at the front end of a doubleheader vs. Tor, and then doing the same with Houck a few weeks later), and a deadline deal that A. had to wait 3 weeks, and B. Added a bat but weakened the D (I LOVE Schwarber, mind you) created a pocket of losing, some of which could have been avoided.
Enough to have won the division? It ain't certain, but -MAYBE.
It's not half bad, so long as you get good Sale and not crap Sale, which at this point is about a 50/50 proposition.Right, I agree with this - maybe. I agree that 92 wins wasn't best case. I also don't think 100 wins was reasonable. Where they were on July 27, I think 95-98 wins was probably the upper case in wins, and as you note, it didn't all have to come against the Rays. So it's possible that an extra deadline acquisition would have been the difference. It's also possible that it still wouldn't have been enough to win the division and they'd be in the same place they are today - hosting the WC game.
So, it's all in the past now. Win tonight and it's borderline irrelevant (I say borderline because playing tonight obviously has some effect on the pitching rotation).
Edit: that said, if the Sox win tonight, I think the schedule lines up so they could pitch Sale in games 2 and 5, and Eovaldi in game 3, of the ALDS. That's not half bad.
If they sox win 3 more games against TB of those 13 you mention, that brings TB to 97 and the Sox 95. But they don't have to make up the entire 8 game difference all against the Rays ... If they win 3 there, then, they would have needed two more against other teams, to tie at 97. Given where they were on July 27 (2 games in first, second best record in the majors behind SF), getting to 97 wins was certainly very possible.
I don't see 92 wins as the best case scenario, from where they stood July 27. It's somewhere in the middle. Some regression to the mean was probable. But bad luck with injuries, COVID, some fatal managerial decisions (pulling Pivetta early at the front end of a doubleheader vs. Tor, and then doing the same with Houck a few weeks later), and a deadline deal that A. had to wait 3 weeks, and B. Added a bat but weakened the D (I LOVE Schwarber, mind you) created a pocket of losing, some of which could have been avoided.
Enough to have won the division? It ain't certain, but -MAYBE.
While I understand the "best case" analysis, I think it wrongly assumes that TB (for example) does not have a similar "best case" that *they* did not achieve and that would still leave the Sox similarly behind TB in the end.Right, I agree with this - maybe. I agree that 92 wins wasn't best case. I also don't think 100 wins was reasonable. Where they were on July 27, I think 95-98 wins was probably the upper case in wins, and as you note, it didn't all have to come against the Rays. So it's possible that an extra deadline acquisition would have been the difference. It's also possible that it still wouldn't have been enough to win the division and they'd be in the same place they are today - hosting the WC game.
This is definitely what if-casting, but if the Sox played .500 against NY as well, instead of 0 - 6 in their last six games head to head, they not only would have won the Division outright, NY would have been the odd team out in the WC race with Toronto and Tampa Bay playing today instead.This year has really been a Rorschach test, hasn't it?
If they sox win 3 more games against TB of those 13 you mention, that brings TB to 97 and the Sox 95. But they don't have to make up the entire 8 game difference all against the Rays ... If they win 3 there, then, they would have needed two more against other teams, to tie at 97. Given where they were on July 27 (2 games in first, second best record in the majors behind SF), getting to 97 wins was certainly very possible.
Damn, the COVID outbreak alone cost them a couple games.
Waiting for Schwarber and Sale (and Houck), banged up a bit, the team cratered between end of July and Mid August.Then there was a flurry when they joined and then the outbreak (it was probably the under-the-radar feat of the season that they played .500 ball through all the COVID absences. HERE, Cora deserves credit).
I don't see 92 wins as the best case scenario, from where they stood July 27. It's somewhere in the middle. Some regression to the mean was probable. But bad luck with injuries, COVID, some fatal managerial decisions (pulling Pivetta early at the front end of a doubleheader vs. Tor, and then doing the same with Houck a few weeks later), and a deadline deal that A. had to wait 3 weeks, and B. Added a bat but weakened the D (I LOVE Schwarber, mind you) created a pocket of losing, some of which could have been avoided.
Enough to have won the division? It ain't certain, but -MAYBE.
I'm no math whiz, but is this possible/accurate? Does this mean TB just crushed the other 3?The Jays and Sox were 28-29 vs the three others.
The Yanks were 25-32.
Tampa was 18-1 against the O's. Sox were 13-6, Yankees 11-8, Jays 14-5.I'm no math whiz, but is this possible/accurate? Does this mean TB just crushed the other 3?
If so, it just goes to show the impact that having a total punching bag (O's) in the division can have, and how critical it is to win those games.
Yes, that's astute. For Sox to have held the division, they would have had to have their best case, and TB's less than best case.While I understand the "best case" analysis, I think it wrongly assumes that TB (for example) does not have a similar "best case" that *they* did not achieve and that would still leave the Sox similarly behind TB in the end.