The Totally Non Official Precursor To The Official Predictions Thread

How Many Games Will The Sox Win?

  • 100+

    Votes: 10 3.0%
  • 95-99

    Votes: 19 5.7%
  • 90-94

    Votes: 130 39.3%
  • 85-89

    Votes: 144 43.5%
  • 80-84

    Votes: 22 6.6%
  • 75-79

    Votes: 3 0.9%
  • 70-74

    Votes: 1 0.3%
  • <70

    Votes: 2 0.6%

  • Total voters
    331

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I would have guessed somewhere in the upper 80's before the start of the season. 
 
It's only been 5 games to this point but it's sure as hell nicer that the Sox are 4-1.  The end of the Tito era and the disastrous Bobby the Fifth interregnum had a series of terrible starts that kept the team out of the playoffs in some cases or foreshadowed the shit show to come in others. 
 
Here are some memories which most of us comfortably repressed:
 
2008 -- Started off 5-6 but roared back to 15-7.  Nevertheless, this mediocre start helped result in the Rays winning the division by two games over the Sox and allowed them to host game 7.
 
2009 -- Started off 2-6 then roared back to 13-6 on the way to another wildcard
 
2010 -- Started off 4-9 and only got back to 11-12 by the end of April.  Won 89 games and ended up out of the playoffs by 6 games.
 
2011 -- Started off 1-7 then 2-10.  Won 90 games by the end of the season but out of the playoffs by 1 game.
 
2012 -- Started off 1-5 then 4-10.  Got back to 11-11 but slid back to 12-19 on the way to a terrible 69 win season.
 
2013 -- Started off 12-4 and kept kicking ass en route to 97 wins.
 
2014 -- Started off 5-9 before righting the ship to 13-14 by the end of April but the team couldn't even maintain a record that mediocre, sliding to 71 wins at the finish.
 
They all count. 
 
The 2002 Red Sox was a team which had great strengths and also holes through which you could drive a truck, including being managed by a genial moron.  One problem with that team, in retrospect, was that someone on the roster or management looked at their season's schedule and decided that the late season schedule was easy.  We heard from the press at multiple points during the campaign that the team was expecting to make hay in that easy late season portion of the schedule.  That Red Sox team was only a couple games out of the playoffs in late July and got pushed further and further out from there.  The late season schedule didn't turn out to be all that easy.  Human nature is such that if you give anyone an excuse to fail today because success is deemed certain tomorrow, you'll get more failure today.  You might not get more success tomorrow but today's game counts just as much as tomorrow's.  It's good to be 4-1.
 

dbn

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 10, 2007
7,785
La Mancha.
Thanks for posting that. However, I will add that I think their 2015 schedule to date has been easy. The Phillies and the MFY are not going to be good this year.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,635
Bump. Always fun to look back on these things. With a little more luck health-wise, this team really should have been in the 85-89 wins range. We lost the second-best hitter, MVP second baseman, #1 starter, and closer for long periods of the season. Despite the brutal May-July stretch, if we had a healthier roster this team could have been looking at playing at least one additional game in October.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Trautwein's Degree said:
81 wins. The rotation has serious question marks and the bullpen even more. This team is better than last year. They'll tease and they'll frustrate. But ultimately the plusses and minuses cancel each other out and this team finishes .500 + or - 1 or 2 games.
 
Nailed it. 
 

MyDaughterLovesTomGordon

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
14,311
Hanley really was a lot worse than people thought he'd be.

But just about everybody knew the starting pitching was a problem. That whole five aces thing...
 

Hagios

New Member
Dec 15, 2007
672
Minneapolis Millers said:
I think it's funny that people "worry" about our potential LF defense.  Seriously, of all the things to worry about with a baseball team, LF defense wouldn't typically make any top 10 list.  Teams have been stashing bad defenders there forever.
 
This was a completely reasonable statement and yet somehow I've been thinking about it all season. We don't have 3 years of data and it's hard to account for the Green Monster in UZR stats, but Ramirez' defense was atypically bad.
 

Adrian's Dome

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 6, 2010
4,424
Hagios said:
 
This was a completely reasonable statement and yet somehow I've been thinking about it all season. We don't have 3 years of data and it's hard to account for the Green Monster in UZR stats, but Ramirez' defense was atypically bad.
Was it, though? I mean, we all thought it'd work out better, but for a guy that's lost most of his athleticism and had never previously played the OF combined with the Monster factor, I don't see the result as that unprecedented. I don't think it would've been much different had we thrown Napoli out there, as an example.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,783
The wrong side of the bridge....
Adrian's Dome said:
Was it, though? I mean, we all thought it'd work out better, but for a guy that's lost most of his athleticism and had never previously played the OF combined with the Monster factor, I don't see the result as that unprecedented. I don't think it would've been much different had we thrown Napoli out there, as an example.
 
But the "lost most of his athleticism" part is 20/20 hindsight; it was by no means a given going into the season. The default narrative was that this was a logical move for an athletic guy moving into his 30s and that with a brief adjustment period he should fit in nicely. I don't think most people were prepared for how stiff and slow and awkward he has looked--including, apparently, the Sox FO.