Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 52 of 52
  1. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Louisville, Colorado
    Posts
    23,131
    I agree. 2007's pen was ridiculous. That being said we're in great shape counting the fact our hitting and starting pitching is better this year compared to 2007.

  2. #47
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    44,371
    Quote Originally Posted by avrpatsfan View Post
    I agree. 2007's pen was ridiculous. That being said we're in great shape counting the fact our hitting and starting pitching is better this year compared to 2007.
    Not so fast. The SP staff on paper wasn't as good, but, we had:

    1. Beckett - in his top year
    2. Schilling - injury riddled year, showed up in the playoffs
    3. Dice - above average
    4. Wakefield - average with 189 IP
    5. Gabbard early and Lester late offered a big lift

    The difference between SP and pen is somewhat artificial. The Red Sox in 2007 posted a 123 ERA+ (657 runs allowed); I believe that is the best ERA+ in Red Sox history ('02 was just behind at 122). 1918 with 380 runs allowed isn't it, or 1981, or any of the 5 years I looked at.

    The Red Sox scored 867 runs in 2007. That means the 2007 team was an immense +210 run differential. WS teams often have a 160 or better.

    In 2010 the Sox scored 818, and gave up 744 for a +74.

    I'd say this team is capable of scoring 870-920 - call it 895. A +210 would then mean 685 runs given up. That's 59 less runs allowed then last year. It's doable.

    But it's the 2012-2104 period that I think we'll have an historic team in terms of differential.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  3. #48
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Louisville, Colorado
    Posts
    23,131
    Quote Originally Posted by bagwell368 View Post
    Not so fast. The SP staff on paper wasn't as good, but, we had:

    1. Beckett - in his top year
    2. Schilling - injury riddled year, showed up in the playoffs
    3. Dice - above average
    4. Wakefield - average with 189 IP
    5. Gabbard early and Lester late offered a big lift

    The difference between SP and pen is somewhat artificial. The Red Sox in 2007 posted a 123 ERA+ (657 runs allowed); I believe that is the best ERA+ in Red Sox history ('02 was just behind at 122). 1918 with 380 runs allowed isn't it, or 1981, or any of the 5 years I looked at.

    The Red Sox scored 867 runs in 2007. That means the 2007 team was an immense +210 run differential. WS teams often have a 160 or better.

    In 2010 the Sox scored 818, and gave up 744 for a +74.

    I'd say this team is capable of scoring 870-920 - call it 895. A +210 would then mean 685 runs given up. That's 59 less runs allowed then last year. It's doable.

    But it's the 2012-2104 period that I think we'll have an historic team in terms of differential.
    I agree with most of this. I still am confidant that our 2011 rotation will be better than our 2007 rotation though. Our rotation for next year still has to prove itself though. Beckett and Lackey are both huge question marks, but I'd easily take them over Wakefield and Dice-K as 3 and 4 starters in 2007. I just personally think
    Lester
    Buchholz
    Beckett
    Lackey
    Dice-K
    is better than
    Beckett
    Schilling
    Dice-K
    Wake
    Gabbard/Lester(2007)

    If Beckett and Lackey both post around 4.00 ERAs which is very reasonable we will have a 100+ win team likely. If they don't we will have some problems on our hands. All signs are pointing to bounceback years from Beckett and Lackey so I think we're in great shape ATM.

  4. #49
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    44,371
    Quote Originally Posted by avrpatsfan View Post
    I agree with most of this. I still am confidant that our 2011 rotation will be better than our 2007 rotation though. Our rotation for next year still has to prove itself though. Beckett and Lackey are both huge question marks, but I'd easily take them over Wakefield and Dice-K as 3 and 4 starters in 2007. I just personally think
    Lester
    Buchholz
    Beckett
    Lackey
    Dice-K
    is better than
    Beckett
    Schilling
    Dice-K
    Wake
    Gabbard/Lester(2007)

    If Beckett and Lackey both post around 4.00 ERAs which is very reasonable we will have a 100+ win team likely. If they don't we will have some problems on our hands. All signs are pointing to bounceback years from Beckett and Lackey so I think we're in great shape ATM.
    Yes, that's why I said on paper 2011 should be better then 2007 in terms of SP's. 2007 SP ERA+ was probably about 107 which is just good. But the pen ERA must have been ~145 or so. So even if the SP ERA+ this year is 115, and the pen is 125, you'll end up with a worse ERA+ then 2007.

    I'm not happy with Wakefield as the #6 SP. Hopefully he retires or is retired before he does much damage. Then what? Doubront, Tazawa?, Britton and Ranaudo as post 9/1 possibles? Not that heart warming a group.

    Dice could be anywhere from a 75-115 ERA+ - call him a 95
    Lester & Buchholz? A slide back for one, call it a 135 and a 115
    Lackey - 112
    Beckett - 75-120 range - he's a wilder card IMO then Dice.

    If the worst one is injured 1/2 the year, we'll top 2007 SP easily. If our best pitcher spends half the year on DL, then it's no sure bet.

    Pitching much harder to call then hitting before a season.

    If we end up with the #1 or #2 offense in runs scored, top 5 defense, and top 5 ERA+, then it's 97+ wins. But with the best adjusted ERA, we've got a 104+ win team on our hands.

    I still feel 2012-2014 is sweet spot for this team. Ortiz, Drew, Cameron, Scutaro, Tek, Paps, Wake - gone. A farm that looks like it will deliver a lot in those years, these years will be talked about with awe 50 years from now.
    I am not a con artist! I am a businessman! I have a big brain and I'm good at making deals! People are just jealous of my BIG BRAIN! BAD!

    Guess who? The future X-Presdent...

  5. #50
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Louisville, Colorado
    Posts
    23,131
    Quote Originally Posted by bagwell368 View Post
    Yes, that's why I said on paper 2011 should be better then 2007 in terms of SP's. 2007 SP ERA+ was probably about 107 which is just good. But the pen ERA must have been ~145 or so. So even if the SP ERA+ this year is 115, and the pen is 125, you'll end up with a worse ERA+ then 2007.

    I'm not happy with Wakefield as the #6 SP. Hopefully he retires or is retired before he does much damage. Then what? Doubront, Tazawa?, Britton and Ranaudo as post 9/1 possibles? Not that heart warming a group.

    Dice could be anywhere from a 75-115 ERA+ - call him a 95
    Lester & Buchholz? A slide back for one, call it a 135 and a 115
    Lackey - 112
    Beckett - 75-120 range - he's a wilder card IMO then Dice.

    If the worst one is injured 1/2 the year, we'll top 2007 SP easily. If our best pitcher spends half the year on DL, then it's no sure bet.

    Pitching much harder to call then hitting before a season.

    If we end up with the #1 or #2 offense in runs scored, top 5 defense, and top 5 ERA+, then it's 97+ wins. But with the best adjusted ERA, we've got a 104+ win team on our hands.

    I still feel 2012-2014 is sweet spot for this team. Ortiz, Drew, Cameron, Scutaro, Tek, Paps, Wake - gone. A farm that looks like it will deliver a lot in those years, these years will be talked about with awe 50 years from now.
    Great post. I agree with everything you said.

  6. #51
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Greenville, SC
    Posts
    17,944
    Quote Originally Posted by GoldDustTwin View Post
    Probably a 12 gauge or 14 gauge.

    Or perhaps you prefer to make fun of people's solecisms by using archaic, medieval spellings............
    I was pointing out that 'gaged' was not a word. Neither is it a solecism. It's just an error.

    Quote Originally Posted by StealingFirst View Post
    I'm not sure that's how it works. I thought a minor league contract can be purchased by a Major League team without any risk of consequence. If he was on the major league roster and was sent down he would be exposed to waivers, but not the other way around.

    If they hadn't non-tendered him and we was still on his original contract then they wouldn't be able to assign him to the minor leagues without worrying about other teams claiming him, but because he was non-tendered and signed a minor league deal, he can start the year in the minors and be promoted without worry.

    Or, am I wrong?
    You're right. GeronimoSon has a penchant for playing MLB Cliff Clavin (but at least he's dropped that ridiculous tag line). Waivers would only come into play if Miller made the MLB club and then the Sox chose to send him back down for some reason.

  7. #52
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    4,392

    clairifcation....Andrew Miller

    Quote Originally Posted by RedSox>Yankees View Post
    No, you're right.
    •Manager Terry Francona explained to ESPN's Gordon Edes that he's thinking about the long-term with lefty Andrew Miller (Twitter link). The Red Sox were able to get a unique contract approved for Miller with the aim of subverting the option system, with a $3MM club option that vests for 2012 if he's claimed by another team. On one hand, the Commissioner's Office allowed this clause at first pass. Still, I've spoken to a few execs who think the Red Sox won't get away with it if Miller is actually claimed

    ooops...

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •