Will the real Red Sox please stand up? I repeat, will the real Red Sox please stand up?

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
3,409
With regard to the post minimizing the run that Bobby is on because most of his home runs have come against say replacement level pitching, I dont feel the same way. So many at bats during the year are against mediocre pitching. What is more important to me is the fact that when he hits the ball, he makes elite contact. The problem is that he has not been able to put the ball in play enough against righties. During his hot streak, he has been much improved at this skill. Can you imagine what everyones numbers in baseball would look like if we took out their stats against everyone excluding say the top 3 starters and top 2 relievers?
This is exactly right. It's not fair to single out Dalbec's stats against "inferior opposition" or saying that "it all happened during blowouts". That happens to everyone and levels out across an entire season. Removing that stuff is good to look at with many, many many grains of salt in order to ascertain what type of player someone may be going forward but it has to be put in context to other players too, who also would need to have their highs and lows removed. It's Eric Van crap....
There's really no other way around it- He's been an absolute beast at the dish the last 6 weeks. Defensively, despite his two good plays yesterday... he's still a mess but could possibly improve with more time there. If he can... and if his recent stretch is even close to a normal going forward, the lineup is the best in the league.
 

Yo La Tengo

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 21, 2005
262
What irked me about that play was the decision to dive. Risk/Reward went right out the window. It was probably an inside-the-park if Renfroe fails to back that up...versus a single, or probably a double with Wendel's speed.

(BTW, how can anyone blame Wendel for that? The, "...don't make the third out..." thing is fine, but that was an almost certain triple, or even a scoring play if the throw sails. It took perfection by both Refroe and Dalbec to execute a beautiful thing - a triple all the way once Santana decided he wanted to be a hero)
As for Santana's debacle on that final ball, he came so close to blowing the game. He can't be penciled in there again this season.

(It was an understandable baserunning decision by Wendel but not forgivable. A runner simply cannot get thrown out at third in that situation, even it if is spectacularly unlikely.)

Big picture, can Hernandez back in CF stabilize the defense? Who is the preferred option at second? Thoughts on Arrauz defensively at second... it sounds like Arroyo is still a ways off from returning.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
14,912
Miami (oh, Miami!)
With regard to the post minimizing the run that Bobby is on because most of his home runs have come against say replacement level pitching, I dont feel the same way.
Yes. I'm sure they're all excellent pitchers. Most excellent.

Clearly the entire defense is a mess right now due to lack of ability to play any position at all plus COVID decimating the roster forcing all sorts of strange lineup configurations. There's no reason, however, for Santana to ever play CF again.
I don't disagree, but for thread-posterity, FWIW, Santana was in left when Cora PH for the 8 and 9 hitters in the 8th.

Going into the 9th Cora had the following:

Lineup: Hernandez, Renfroe, JD (dh), Devers, Dalbec, Plawecki, Santana, Verdugo, Schwarber
Out - Iglesias, Werewolf.
Bench - Shaw, Vaz.

So, for optimum defense:
C: Plaw.
1B: Shaw, 2B: Devers, SS: Hernandez, 3B: Dalbec.
LF: Verdugo, CF: Santana, RF: Renfroe.

Maybe you swap Verdugo and Santana. But Verdugo's been a bit of a hot mess in the field.
Maybe you go with a Schawber/JD, Verdugo, Renfroe OF, to get Santana at 1B? But I think Santana is a better LF than either, and not that much of an upgrade over Shaw.

All in all, I'd say it was in the realm of a coin flip. If Verdugo didn't have his recent OF mishaps, I'd feel more strongly about the manager putting him out there.

I think Santana has decided any future coin-flips though.
 

cantor44

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 23, 2020
701
Chicago, IL
The defense is horrendous and the Schwarber trade exacerbated their problems. He could work well in a reorg in 2022 as the DH, if JD was gone. But as it is ....

In the irony of all ironies, the team is lucky Dalbec has been so stellar the last month and a half, with even his D noticeably improving.

In 2004 Epstein saw the team needed significantly improved D and went out and got it. Bold, creative and insightful, nothing sacred. I suppose the 2021 team has needed, iteratively more than just D, so Bloom's challenge steeper ... Nevertheless, Bloom squinted his eyes and thought an injured Schwarb would work, pretending the impact on D wouldn't matter. OR .... he kinda knew it wouldn't but felt he had to do something for appearances. Not sure which makes me more disillusioned.

In any event, the team has talent, but a horrible weakness. Like an attractive and smart girlfriend/boyfriend who turns out to be mean to children or something ...just won't do ....
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
3,708
Portland
Something that hasn't been talked about much at all is the almost complete lack of positive contributions from anyone who started the season in the minors. Normally there is at least one guy who comes up and surprises or a prospect who adapts right away.

The biggest "contributor" by fWAR has been Connor Wong with .2 in 14 plate appearances. Virtually every other one of the 18 remaining players have had zero impact either way. This isn't even factoring in Franchy, Santana, Robles, Peacock or Davis who have probably net a few losses themselves. Granted, the definition of replacement level guys are generally AAA call ups, but the lack of minor leaguers forcing the issue really stands out.

The most notable guy has basically been Yacksel Rios unless you want to count Shaw who at least has a track record. Arauz won them a game, but has been ineffective otherwise.

This really does reinforce how fortunate they have been with the lack of serious injuries. Honestly, this might be the strangest Red Sox season ever but I'm enjoying the ride regardless.
 
Last edited:

donutogre

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
2,514
Philadelphia
This tweet kind of says it all to me. We know the defense has been atrocious, but looking at the box score from last night and seeing that four of the five runs the Mariners scored were unearned? That's a special kind of brutal, and I feel like ever game has had numerous unearned runs lately. Maybe not this bad, but it's impossible to be consistent when you're giving it up like that.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
View: https://twitter.com/redsoxstats/status/1437460812432646145?s=20


The team is not only fundamentally flawed, they are fundamentally broken. We've talked extensively about the defensive issues, but the pitching execution has been horrible (they give up an inordinate number of HRs with 2 strikes), and they walk too many hitters. I honestly feel a huge part of this is Vazquez, who has been pretty much checked out for the second half of this year and his head is obviously not in the game. The pitch selection has been atrocious.

I don't see how anyone can enjoy watching this team play such horrible fundamental baseball. I don't think it's too much to ask for at least professional play. They are executing like a team in Single A. I wouldn't mind that so much if there was the slightest indication that any of their problems were being addressed. But every night it's another 3 unearned runs and bad situational pitching.
 
Last edited:

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
9,242
Some fancy town in CT
Single A? You are way too generous SJH.

It’s also uncanny how every mistake they make gets pounced on as if they were facing the 90s Yankees every night. A two out bases empty error is usually not a big deal. But not for these clowns.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Single A? You are way too generous SJH.

It’s also uncanny how every mistake they make gets pounced on as if they were facing the 90s Yankees every night. A two out bases empty error is usually not a big deal. But not for these clowns.
Cora keeps praising them for "battling" but it seems to me their mental strength is soft as hell. If it's a close game late they certainly are excellent and finding ways to blow it. 0-2 pitch in the bottom of the 9th in a tie game? Sure, I'll groove it right down the middle! One run lead at home in the top of the 9th? Let's give up a Yakety Sax inside the park home run! An error with 2 outs in the 7th to extend the inning? It's 3 run jack time!
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
It's definitely not fun to watch them play such undisciplined and poor baseball. But it is fun to be in a playoff race and to be playing meaningful games after two straight disastrous seasons.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
It's definitely not fun to watch them play such undisciplined and poor baseball. But it is fun to be in a playoff race and to be playing meaningful games after two straight disastrous seasons.
This is rapidly turning into a 3rd straight disastrous season. A 65 game stretch of below .500 baseball and a total free fall in the AL standings. Absolutely terrible.

If they do miss the postseason, I suspect the FO is in for an exceptionally rude awakening next year when the fans stay away, especially if the Pats are decent this season. No one is going to watch these guys stumble around in 3rd place year after year.

If Bloom doesn't address the defense next year he's completely over his head as GM. This cannot stand. He's put together a team full of DHs. X has to be moved off short soon as well. It's going to be a very difficult offseason for Bloom, because he has a bunch of square pegs and round holes.
 
Last edited:

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
This is rapidly turning into a 3rd straight disastrous season. A 65 game stretch of below .500 baseball and a total free fall in the AL standings. Absolutely terrible.

If they do miss the postseason, I suspect the FO is in for an exceptionally rude awakening next year when the fans stay away, especially if the Pats are decent this season. No one is going to watch these guys stumble around in 3rd place year after year.

If Bloom doesn't address the defense next year he's completely over his head as GM. This cannot stand. He's put together a team full of DHs.
This isn't by any means a "disastrous" season. They're probably going to end up with about 90 wins.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
This isn't by any means a "disastrous" season. They're probably going to end up with about 90 wins.
They're in 4th place as of this morning. After leading the division in July. That is a disaster by any definition.

They had 15 games left and need to win 9 of them to get to 90 wins. They have been a below .500 team for 3 months and half the team is on the COVID list and the other half has hands like feet. They're not reaching 90 wins because they are unable to fix any of their glaring deficiencies.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
@Smiling Joe Hesketh - Have you stopped watching this team yet? When you say, "I don't see how anyone can enjoy watching this team play" and call this season a rapidly developing "disaster", I'm guessing you just don't have the stomach to watch them, right?

Or are you a glutton for punishment?
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
@Smiling Joe Hesketh - Have you stopped watching this team yet? When you say, "I don't see how anyone can enjoy watching this team play" and call this season a rapidly developing "disaster", I'm guessing you just don't have the stomach to watch them, right?

Or are you a glutton for punishment?
We all have our irrational moments.

Again, I don't understand how anyone can enjoy watching this team kick away games night after night in the very same way. It's infuriating.

Up 4 1/2 games on the entire division on July 5th and now they're 9 games back. That's every bit as big a free fall as 1978 (14 games) which everyone would agree was a fiasco of a season, 99 wins or not. Yes, TB and now TOR have played great (like NYY did in '78), but even halfway decent play by the Sox would put them in the divisional lead or close to it.

So yes, this has been a disaster.

Next year's TV and attendance figures should be very interesting. Fans aren't going to put up with this level of play, especially if the Patriots turn out to be halfway decent.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
They're in 4th place as of this morning. After leading the division in July. That is a disaster by any definition.

They had 15 games left and need to win 9 of them to get to 90 wins. They have been a below .500 team for 3 months and half the team is on the COVID list and the other half has hands like feet. They're not reaching 90 wins because they are unable to fix any of their glaring deficiencies.
No, it's not a disaster by any definition if you win 90 games and finish in fourth place. Good grief.

The Red Sox had the lead in the division last before games were played on July 31. Since then...

- Bos has gone 18-23 (.439) - not good, but TONS of other good teams, World Series-winning teams, have had similar stretches over the course of 162 games. We've chronicled a bunch here this year already in this forum. So it's not REMOTELY out of the ordinary for this kind of thing to happen even to outstanding championship teams (not that this team is "outstanding", but the point stands)

Meanwhile,
- TB has gone 27-13 (.675)
- NY has gone 26-16 (.619)
- Tor has gone 29-15 (.659)

So the rest of the division has played GREAT at the same time Boston has played poorly. The AL East could easily finish with four teams having 90+ wins. No shame in that.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
803
A team can have a winning season and still be a disappointment (see 2003, 2011, etc). To finish fourth and not win 90 would be a disappointing end to what started off so promising. This team hasn’t been enjoyable to watch for months. How you finish matters, and the manner by which they have done it is certainly concerning- the core of this team does not look like a current or future contender to me, and if they limp to the finish line I’d expect some massive changes in the off-season.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
.439 from a division leader is just about the worst possible kind of record to have no matter what the other teams do. There's plenty of shame in that.

You're welcome to enjoy the team in any way you like, but I don't have to do the same and I don't pretend to understand it. They're not some scrappy underdogs playing over their heads, they're a $200 million payroll team playing ball that a minor league manager would get fired over. It's one thing to have a season like '91, where they were chasing a clearly better team most of the year and gave them hell along the way, it's quite another to literally kick a division away because they can't field, can't hit situationally, and can't pitch up 0-2. But boy, Cora's sure proud his team played hard, right? The post-game ice cream will make everything better.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
Disappointing yes. But not at "disaster". Not if you're coming off two straight years where you're bad and completely out of it right from the start, and you've:

- Won 90 games (which is our hypothetical here)
- Had to deal with a massive Covid outbreak
- Added a ton of young talent via the draft and trades
- And been in the playoff mix right to the end of the season, thus you've played meaningful games all year long

That's not a disaster. It's disappointing but not a disaster. A disaster is winning 69 games and having no future.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
.439 from a division leader is just about the worst possible kind of record to have no matter what the other teams do. There's plenty of shame in that.

You're welcome to enjoy the team in any way you like, but I don't have to do the same and I don't pretend to understand it. They're not some scrappy underdogs playing over their heads, they're a $200 million payroll team playing ball that a minor league manager would get fired over. It's one thing to have a season like '91, where they were chasing a clearly better team most of the year and gave them hell along the way, it's quite another to literally kick a division away because they can't field, can't hit situationally, and can't pitch up 0-2. But boy, Cora's sure proud his team played hard, right? The post-game ice cream will make everything better.
The 2004 Red Sox had a stretch from May 29-July 23 where they went 22-26 (.458), including a stretch from May 29-July 4 where they went 13-18 (.419). It happens, and can happen even to the best teams. It's a long season, and over the course of 162 games, even really really good teams that win championships have stretches like that from time to time.

Over that stretch, the Sox went from being a half-game up on the Yankees to being 9.5 back. It happens, SJH.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Disappointing yes. But not at "disaster". Not if you're coming off two straight years where you're bad and completely out of it right from the start, and you've:

- Won 90 games (which is our hypothetical here)
- Had to deal with a massive Covid outbreak
- Added a ton of young talent via the draft and trades
- And been in the playoff mix right to the end of the season, thus you've played meaningful games all year long

That's not a disaster. It's disappointing but not a disaster. A disaster is winning 69 games and having no future.
- won 90 games (which is hardly assured and I would argue is very unlikely) after playing at a 101 win pace for the 1st half
- a massive COVID outbreak fueled in large part by a larger than normal % of players who aren't vaxxed (yes yes , take it to V&N)
- What young talent? their second rounder didn't sign, and Schwarber isn't exactly 22, and the guys called up from AAA have largely been awful. Whitlock is the only clear win.
- They are about to be booted out of the running for the 2nd WC spot, so if it's a participation trophy you're looking for I suppose that's a positive.

This team has a $200 million payroll and you're happy they were in the playoff mix for a while? Really?

All this after a disappointing year, trading their beloved superstar because they didn't want to pay him, and then having the worst season since Bobby Valentine was here while their manager was suspended a year for cheating. The first half of this year gave hope that they could purge a lot of the bad feelings that have surrounded this team since the Mookie trade, and they promptly blew it in the most amateurish way possible, and thus compounded those bad feelings.

This has been a fiasco.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
803
Every team has a future- every team, even that 69 win team, has prospects they think are gonna be great. Right now, this looks like a 4th place team that has an ok farm system and will be looking up at TB, NY, and TOR next season too. It’s a pretty big fall from where the team was just 3 years ago.

The key question remains- are Bogaerts, Devers, and Sale key players on the best great Red Sox team? Is Cora the manager of that team. Showing some fire and finishing strong may help answers those questions.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
No. But it's not a *DISASTER* to finish fourth if you win 90 games. It means you're in a frigging impossibly tough division, but you're still a pretty darned good team.
A huge part of the reason the other 3 teams are ahead of the Sox is because they have been kicking the Sox' asses in the second half.

vx. NYY: 3-6
vs. TOR: 5-4 (2 game losing HRs allowed by Barnes)
vs. TB: 3-9

The division appears so good in large part because the Sox have been SO BAD against them. Even halfway decent play against those teams changes the picture in the division dramatically.
 

bosockboy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
14,937
St. Louis, MO
- won 90 games (which is hardly assured and I would argue is very unlikely) after playing at a 101 win pace for the 1st half
- a massive COVID outbreak fueled in large part by a larger than normal % of players who aren't vaxxed (yes yes , take it to V&N)
- What young talent? their second rounder didn't sign, and Schwarber isn't exactly 22, and the guys called up from AAA have largely been awful. Whitlock is the only clear win.
- They are about to be booted out of the running for the 2nd WC spot, so if it's a participation trophy you're looking for I suppose that's a positive.

This team has a $200 million payroll and you're happy they were in the playoff mix for a while? Really?

All this after a disappointing year, trading their beloved superstar because they didn't want to pay him, and then having the worst season since Bobby Valentine was here while their manager was suspended a year for cheating. The first half of this year gave hope that they could purge a lot of the bad feelings that have surrounded this team since the Mookie trade, and they promptly blew it in the most amateurish way possible, and thus compounded those bad feelings.

This has been a fiasco.
Were your expectations a 100 win division champion?
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Were your expectations a 100 win division champion?
My expectations after the first half were a divisional title. Up 4.5 games in the division with this kind of payroll and talent and with Sale due back, that was a reasonable expectation.

My expectations certainly weren't seeing a replay of the 2020 Red Sox, that's for damn sure. And lest you think that's exaggeration, the 2020 Sox played .400 ball over 60 games. The 2021 Red Sox are playing .439 ball over 65 games despite supposedly being far better. They are not.
 

John Marzano Olympic Hero

has fancy plans, and pants to match
Dope
Apr 12, 2001
20,680
No. But it's not a *DISASTER* to finish fourth if you win 90 games. It means you're in a frigging impossibly tough division, but you're still a pretty darned good team.
Okay. We set a baseline. No one thought that the Sox were a 69-win team at the beginning of the year. Not even the most pessimistic of us, so that's a bit of a strawman argument. Most thought that we'd land between 75-85 wins, so from a preseason POV, the Sox beat our expectations. But this team had a terrific April, May and June and our preseason expectations changed. It wasn't like they were leading the Rays, Yanks and Jays by a game, they had more than a five game lead before the roof caved in. Because of the way the team played in the spring and early summer, our expectations embiggened. No longer was 85 wins, nice; while I don't think anyone thought that we'd win the Series, we certainly didn't think we'd be in a five-team death fight for the final two playoff positions.

I think that's what posters like me or SJH or cantor44 mean when we say this has been a "disaster". The last few months have been a string of frustrating baseball. Sometimes the starters suck, other times it's the relievers, then the team decides that they're going to stop hitting and the defense blows. I mean, I'm not going to go back to the Bloom screwed up the deadline thing because that ship has sailed. But if you can look back at the last two months and feel good about how the Red Sox played, I don't know what to say*.

* And it's cool if you do, BTW. Not that you need my permission, but for me these last two months have been an exercise in frustratiton.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
It's crazy. This team was NEVER a 100-win team. They played really well the first half of the year, but the underlying metrics showed that they were playing above their heads. This should be a 90-win team, which is what so many people thought they'd be at the start of the year. In fact, most fans and "experts" thought that 90 was probably the ceiling. Which may still be true, who knows. That they played above their heads doesn't mean that that was their true level. It wasn't.

The other three teams are almost certainly better than Boston. Tampa is, obviously. No shame in that. They were pretty close to winning the WS last year. Toronto looks like they will be in the end, but they will likely cool off. They can't keep THIS up. And the Yankees? Well, it's no sure thing that they'll end up ahead of the Red Sox here. But if they do, it's also understandable. They have a $203 million payroll (compared to Boston's $182 million), so that extra $21 million ought to buy them a couple more wins, right SJH?
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
The key question remains- are Bogaerts, Devers, and Sale key players on the best great Red Sox team? Is Cora the manager of that team. Showing some fire and finishing strong may help answers those questions.
Those players are, but not at their current positions. X has to be moved off short, which means he goes either to 2B or 3B. If so, whither Raffy? X has a long term deal, Devers doesn't have one yet. They SHOULD build around X and Devers, but then again I thought they should have built around Mookie and Benintendi and we know how that went.

They have far too many DHs on the roster and it's causing innumerable problems. X to 3rd, Raffy to 1B, Shwarber to DH? If so whither Dalbec? JD? Who plays CF? Verdugo certainly can't. Vazquez is going to be non-tendered so they'll need a catcher. Etc etc etc.

I don't think Bloom has a good sense of this type of team building; he's constructed a roster that plays well in Strat-o-matic but the positional limitations kill it on the actual field. This goes back to my thread about winning in Boston vs. winning in TB; you can build a club of misfit toys in Tampa and figure things out because no one is paying attention, you cannot do that here.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
It's crazy. This team was NEVER a 100-win team. They played really well the first half of the year, but the underlying metrics showed that they were playing above their heads. This should be a 90-win team, which is what so many people thought they'd be at the start of the year. In fact, most fans and "experts" thought that 90 was probably the ceiling. Which may still be true, who knows. That they played above their heads doesn't mean that that was their true level. It wasn't.

The other three teams are almost certainly better than Boston. Tampa is, obviously. No shame in that. They were pretty close to winning the WS last year. Toronto looks like they will be in the end, but they will likely cool off. They can't keep THIS up. And the Yankees? Well, it's no sure thing that they'll end up ahead of the Red Sox here. But if they do, it's also understandable. They have a $203 million payroll (compared to Boston's $182 million), so that extra $21 million ought to buy them a couple more wins, right SJH?
The bolded was most assuredly untrue for the first half of the year and you're attempting to make things look inevitable in hindsight. There was no good reason to assume TOR and TB and NYY were better than Boston despite the results; the results themselves disproved that.

There is no excuse for what the Red Sox have done in the second half of the year, and the best way to describe it is a total system failure.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
Okay. We set a baseline. No one thought that the Sox were a 69-win team at the beginning of the year. Not even the most pessimistic of us, so that's a bit of a strawman argument. Most thought that we'd land between 75-85 wins, so from a preseason POV, the Sox beat our expectations. But this team had a terrific April, May and June and our preseason expectations changed. It wasn't like they were leading the Rays, Yanks and Jays by a game, they had more than a five game lead before the roof caved in. Because of the way the team played in the spring and early summer, our expectations embiggened. No longer was 85 wins, nice; while I don't think anyone thought that we'd win the Series, we certainly didn't think we'd be in a five-team death fight for the final two playoff positions.

I think that's what posters like me or SJH or cantor44 mean when we say this has been a "disaster". The last few months have been a string of frustrating baseball. Sometimes the starters suck, other times it's the relievers, then the team decides that they're going to stop hitting and the defense blows. I mean, I'm not going to go back to the Bloom screwed up the deadline thing because that ship has sailed. But if you can look back at the last two months and feel good about how the Red Sox played, I don't know what to say*.

* And it's cool if you do, BTW. Not that you need my permission, but for me these last two months have been an exercise in frustratiton.
Oh believe me, it's been super frustrating to watch, and where I agree with you guys wholeheartedly is that they're playing such CRAP fundamental baseball. Terrible terrible fielding and base running. Inexcusable stuff for a major league team. 100%.

All I'm saying is that if they end up with 90 wins in THIS division, that's not by any means a "disaster". It means they're a pretty good team that's got incredibly tough competition in the division.

The thing is, guys, it's a 162-game season. It's not an 81-game season. You have to play both halves of the season. Teams get hot and not hot all the time during such a long year. I gave you the numbers on the 2004 Red Sox, who had a stretch WORSE than what this current team is doing. It happens. It's awful and frustrating when it happens, but it's actually pretty normal, even for really good teams.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
The bolded was most assuredly untrue for the first half of the year
It's a 162-game season. "Winning" the first half of the year is immaterial. Teams are measured over the course of the entire season, not half the season.

I know you know this.

and you're attempting to make things look inevitable in hindsight. There was no good reason to assume TOR and TB and NYY were better than Boston despite the results; the results themselves disproved that.

There is no excuse for what the Red Sox have done in the second half of the year, and the best way to describe it is a total system failure.
The results for HALF A SEASON showed that for the FIRST HALF, the Red Sox were better. But there was still another half of a season to play.
 

Petagine in a Bottle

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 13, 2021
803
Those players are, but not at their current positions. X has to be moved off short, which means he goes either to 2B or 3B. If so, whither Raffy? X has a long term deal, Devers doesn't have one yet. They SHOULD build around X and Devers, but then again I thought they should have built around Mookie and Benintendi and we know how that went.

They have far too many DHs on the roster and it's causing innumerable problems. X to 3rd, Raffy to 1B, Shwarber to DH? If so whither Dalbec? JD? Who plays CF? Verdugo certainly can't. Vazquez is going to be non-tendered so they'll need a catcher. Etc etc etc.

I don't think Bloom has a good sense of this type of team building; he's constructed a roster that plays well in Strat-o-matic but the positional limitations kill it on the actual field. This goes back to my thread about winning in Boston vs. winning in TB; you can build a club of misfit toys in Tampa and figure things out because no one is paying attention, you cannot do that here.
X has one year left before he can opt out (same as Sale).
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
It's a 162-game season. "Winning" the first half of the year is immaterial. Teams are measured over the course of the entire season, not half the season.

I know you know this.



The results for HALF A SEASON showed that for the FIRST HALF, the Red Sox were better. But there was still another half of a season to play.
And MAGICALLY they just collapsed. Nothing to be done about that except throw up our hands, right? Couldn't possibly fix the constant fielding and baserunning mistakes, or show the slightest bit of urgency and execution in crucial moments, right? Couldn't possibly get their heads out of their asses long enough to prevent inside the park grand slams and tying HRs of course. Here's an 0-2 fastball right down the middle. Ballgame. Ice cream for everyone.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
They'd have to go 9-6 to reach 90. I really can't see it happening.
They play 11 games against the Mets, Orioles, and Nationals (6 of them are against Baltimore). Then they play 5 against Seattle and NY.

You can't see 9 wins against that schedule? I get that the way they're playing, you're having a hard time seeing them beat the Sisters of the Poor, but it's not remotely crazy to see 9 wins against that schedule.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
And MAGICALLY they just collapsed. Nothing to be done about that except throw up our hands, right? Couldn't possibly fix the constant fielding and baserunning mistakes, or show the slightest bit of urgency and execution in crucial moments, right? Couldn't possibly get their heads out of their asses long enough to prevent inside the park grand slams and tying HRs of course. Here's an 0-2 fastball right down the middle. Ballgame. Ice cream for everyone.
No, not "MAGICALLY". They weren't as good as their first half indicated. That was a bit of an illusion. And you fell for it apparently. Lots of people did I suppose. They played over their heads. They came back down to earth. They ought to be better than a .439 team of course, but again, even the 2004 Red Sox had a stretch worse than what the Sox have gone through here. I'm going to repeat that until you acknowledge that it's pretty normal for even really good teams to suffer through stretches of pretty bad baseball.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
They play 11 games against the Mets, Orioles, and Nationals (6 of them are against Baltimore). Then they play 5 against Seattle and NY.

You can't see 9 wins against that schedule? I get that the way they're playing, you're having a hard time seeing them beat the Sisters of the Poor, but it's not remotely crazy to see 9 wins against that schedule.
I don't see 9 wins in that schedule, no. BAL stinks of course but they just took a series against SEA and 3 of those games are on the road. The Mets stink but just took a series from NYY. And of course NYY have killed the Sox in the second half.

I could MAYBE see 7 wins. Maybe. Sale is out, remember?
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
32,005
Deep inside Muppet Labs
No, not "MAGICALLY". They weren't as good as their first half indicated. That was a bit of an illusion. And you fell for it apparently. Lots of people did I suppose. They played over their heads. They came back down to earth. They ought to be better than a .439 team of course, but again, even the 2004 Red Sox had a stretch worse than what the Sox have gone through here. I'm going to repeat that until you acknowledge that it's pretty normal for even really good teams to suffer through stretches of pretty bad baseball.
It is not normal for good teams to play an entire second half at a 71 win pace, which is what the Sox are doing.

They didn't come back down to earth. The bored a hole into the earth and dove headlong into it.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,650
I don't see 9 wins in that schedule, no. BAL stinks of course but they just took a series against SEA and 3 of those games are on the road. The Mets stink but just took a series from NYY. And of course NYY have killed the Sox in the second half.

I could MAYBE see 7 wins. Maybe. Sale is out, remember?
Yeah that part stinks.
 

mfried

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 23, 2005
1,607
The vaccination shortfall is part of the decline. The team needs a vaccination mandate - of course it's too late for this season.