What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Official 2013 World Series Thread Red Sox v Cardinals*** (1 Viewer)

Who wins?

  • Red Sox in 7

    Votes: 4 6.9%
  • Red Sox in 6

    Votes: 20 34.5%
  • Red Sox in 5

    Votes: 7 12.1%
  • Red Sox in 4

    Votes: 3 5.2%
  • Cards in 7

    Votes: 4 6.9%
  • Cards in 6

    Votes: 17 29.3%
  • Cards in 5

    Votes: 2 3.4%
  • Cards in 4

    Votes: 1 1.7%

  • Total voters
    58
Put it this way: if Holliday isn't in the AL two years from now, there's going to be a lot of hits to left field.
I didn't mind when Holliday got hurt during the 2011 Series. I was too worried he would gak a ball hit right at him. Watching Holliday play left makes me want to apologize for all the trouble I gave Lonnie Smith from the Busch II bleachers.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Put it this way: if Holliday isn't in the AL two years from now, there's going to be a lot of hits to left field.
I didn't mind when Holliday got hurt during the 2011 Series. I was too worried he would gak a ball hit right at him.Watching Holliday play left makes me want to apologize for all the trouble I gave Lonnie Smith from the Busch II bleachers.
:lmao:

That said, at least Matt Holliday > Manny Ramirez in LF. :coffee:

 
I hope it's Baby Pedro that gets the first call from the pen if Lynn falters.

BTW, for Red Sox fans, Carlos Martinez is called "Baby Pedro" because he's also a smallish guy named Martinez that throws pure evil. It will be a tragedy if he's not in the rotation next year.
Are you holding him in Uberleeg?

 
Here's hoping the Red Sox show up for a coronation. For those that think Cards SPs are all about 98mph - think again. What they excel at is location and movement with that velocity.
Agreed. Also, there's more than one way to throw 98, giving the hitters different looks even if the radar gun sees it the same. Wacha's vertical motion makes it tough to match the plane of the pitch with the bat (and makes his changeup a lot more effective). Martinez drops his arm some, which make it look like it's going to hit a righty hitter in the ribs before it works its way to the plate. Rosenthal's release is like a catcher's, making him difficult to time even if he tells you he's throwing high cheese before he winds up.

Edge probably does go to Red Sox but as a Cards fan only Lynn really worries me and hopefully he has a short leash if he gets rocked.
I'm scared that whatever spell Wacha has had on hitters over the last month will wear off by Thursday. He seems like the real deal, but he's been defying logic for while now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Put it this way: if Holliday isn't in the AL two years from now, there's going to be a lot of hits to left field.
I didn't mind when Holliday got hurt during the 2011 Series. I was too worried he would gak a ball hit right at him.Watching Holliday play left makes me want to apologize for all the trouble I gave Lonnie Smith from the Busch II bleachers.
:lmao:

That said, at least Matt Holliday > Manny Ramirez in LF. :coffee:
This is where I shoehorn in my theory that Puig is as close to a real-life Pedro Cerrano as we've ever had: Cuban right fielder who fled his home country to pursue his dream, bizarre behavior that polarizes teammates, straight ball he hits very much, bats are afraid of curve ball.
 
The Red Sox 117 OPS+ (league & park adjusted) is the highest team number for a decade. I'm mostly a National League guy but it doesn't _seem_ like this Boston club is the best offensive team since 2003. I suspect the horrendous offenses of Houston and the White Sox skews the formula a bit.
Don't forget the Twins.

 
The Red Sox 117 OPS+ (league & park adjusted) is the highest team number for a decade. I'm mostly a National League guy but it doesn't _seem_ like this Boston club is the best offensive team since 2003. I suspect the horrendous offenses of Houston and the White Sox skews the formula a bit.
Don't forget the Twins.
The Twins' park normalized OPS was better than KC, Yankees, White Sox and Houston (AL only)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blab more when my hands aren't full of infant, but the Cards stole more bases than they gave up. The Sox did not. Mo

ETA: Which isn't to say that the Cards hold a big advantage in terms of the running game, just that it's negligible. The Bracketed One is correct in that Boston's speed advantage will come more into play stretching singles to doubles, staying out of DPs, etc. But it's still small.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
How much does Boston's OPS drop when Ortiz or Napoli is replaced by a pitcher?

The bottom line of the non-pitcher stats is that boston is a superior offense when batting 8 or 9. I'm not sure why you continue to fight this but its simply a fact.

Re: fastball reliance, a big part of that has to be because of Miller, who is basically a one-pitch pitcher, and he's not in their post-season rotation.

This simply isn't true.

The only Cardinals starter with sub 60% fastball rate is Wainright (sinkerballer). Lynn throws more FB's than Miller, and Kelly and Wacha are just a few percent behind Miller.

The VAST majority of the bullpen relies heavily on the heat as well.. most round as much if not more than Miller.

I also don't think Boston's advantage on the basepaths is going to have that big of an effect overall, it just isn't as big a part of the game.

Regarding stolen bases, I agree they may cut back a little but you're still talking about a team who stole well over 100 bases a year. If you don't think Ellsbury and/or victorino are going to swipe a bag or three this series.... likely in key spots... I think you're fooling yourself.

And again, you're completely ignoring the MAIN impact of team speed... and that's stretching singles into doubles, and having very fast 1st to 3rd or 2nd to home times. As stated previously, when paired with STLs horrible range in the OF, it's a bit silly to just brush it off as not a big part of the game :lol:

I think they're going to win this series simply because they hit righties very well, they have a great pen, and no jobbers in their rotation (Dempster, wait). None of Boston's pitchers are as good as Wainwright, but they're all a helluva lot better than "Joe Kelly."

I agree that Cards having a ton of righties hurts... as does their reliance on the fastball. Also agree that the Cards 1/2 on their typical day are on par with Boston's 1/2 on their best days.... starting rotation is definitely a significant plus for the Cards.

Another small factor, playing in Fenway should help disguise Holliday's defensive deficiencies some. At the same time, Boston isn't going to be able to hide Gomes in LF in Busch if they keep playing him over Nava, for God-know-what reason.

The problem with Fenway in Left is there isn't much ground to cover but that wall has made many a visiting LF look stupid... particularly NL guys who don't see it a dozen times a year.
1) Re: 8 vs 9, I'm in no way stating as cold truth that STL's offense is better, I'm merely interested in trying to pinpoint, best we can, how much better one or the other is, given the unique set of circumstances that is the DH rule. The Napoli vs. Ortiz argument is interesting, in that Ortiz really doesn't have much of a sample size to go off in terms of his defense. I mean we all know he's bad, but how bad?

2) I could've sworn that Miller was Bartolo-esque in his pitch selection, and indeed he was around 75% earlier in the year. Interesting that he started throwing a cutter later in the season, which further ate into his FB% numbers. Regardless, I think it's a bad error on STL's part to leave him out for Joe Kelly. Because Joe Kelly is by far and away the worst starter of the 8. STL's pitching overall is very good, but honestly I don't think they have a huge advantage 1-4, if any.

3) Ellsbury or Victorino having anything resembling a green light is just utter and complete tactical negligence. The break-even rate for steals to have a positive effect on one's offense is 75%. Nobody's really been able to sniff that against Molina, and given Boston's extremely good hitting, stealing bases just doesn't make sense at all. I'd also like to urge everyone to read the chapter from Baseball Between The Numbers entitled "What if Rickey Henderson had Pete Incaviglia's Legs?"

4) But as Mr. Dickinson alluded to earlier, Farrell is just a flat-out ####### terrible manager. Given that he keeps going to Gomes, who is worse both offensively (against righties) and defensively than Nava...it's just stupefying. Boston's ascendance has been propelled by a numbers-driven owner who hired a numbers-driven GM who built a team that's obviously been very successful over the last decade (big payroll or no), and that all of that logic-based thinking cannot somehow permeate through the walls of the manager's office when he's filling out the lineup card is utterly absurd. And I'm not sure why he hasn't caught more #### for the Morales fiasco in G6, that was epically stupid, a fact that is by no means lessened by Scherzer having a bad night, Detroit's pen being lousy, and Victorino cranking one out.

I'd take my chances with Holliday being able to figure out the wall, I mean we know he can't field much in a traditional setup. How could it be worse?

All that said, except for STL's defense and Boston's manager, both teams do a lot of things amazingly well. They both not only led their respective leagues in wins, but also in run diff. I want to talk myself into making a play on STL, but I can't do it given HFA. Which really needs to change, btw.

 
Good Posting Judge said:
3) Ellsbury or Victorino having anything resembling a green light is just utter and complete tactical negligence. The break-even rate for steals to have a positive effect on one's offense is 75%. Nobody's really been able to sniff that against Molina
I cant find individual stolen base data, but I would just about guarantee there is some player(s) that have had a greater than 75% success rate against Molina.

However, I dont imagine that the Sox will be running much at all against him. And if so, it will be more targeted towards pitchers that are slow to the mound

 
"Good said:
3) Ellsbury or Victorino having anything resembling a green light is just utter and complete tactical negligence. The break-even rate for steals to have a positive effect on one's offense is 75%. Nobody's really been able to sniff that against Molina
I cant find individual stolen base data, but I would just about guarantee there is some player(s) that have had a greater than 75% success rate against Molina.However, I dont imagine that the Sox will be running much at all against him. And if so, it will be more targeted towards pitchers that are slow to the mound
It isn't so much that Molina throws runners out, but that teams don't even bother trying anymore. Opponents only stole 26 bases on Molina all season. I'm sure you will be able to find someone who was 2-for-2 stealing on Molina, but WGAF?
 
For our Red Sox trying to pass himself off as a stat geek... Boston was right on the league average this season taking extra bases on balls in play. If you want to argue Holliday's limited range and Jay's weak arm will help the Sox take an extra base or two, fine. But don't argue that this was a pre-existing strength or a big factor in Boston's success - they scored a ton of runs because they got on base a lot, and the impact their ability to manufacture runs has on winning games has been greatly overstated in this thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Good said:
3) Ellsbury or Victorino having anything resembling a green light is just utter and complete tactical negligence. The break-even rate for steals to have a positive effect on one's offense is 75%. Nobody's really been able to sniff that against Molina
I cant find individual stolen base data, but I would just about guarantee there is some player(s) that have had a greater than 75% success rate against Molina.However, I dont imagine that the Sox will be running much at all against him. And if so, it will be more targeted towards pitchers that are slow to the mound
It isn't so much that Molina throws runners out, but that teams don't even bother trying anymore. Opponents only stole 26 bases on Molina all season. I'm sure you will be able to find someone who was 2-for-2 stealing on Molina, but WGAF?
This. The other part of it that hasn't been stated and others may not realize is that Molina doesn't just have an impact on stolen bases. He has a huge impact on the leads that runners will take because of his ability to pick off a runner that takes too big a lead or secondary lead. This helps reduce runners advancing that extra base on hits into the outfield.

I know some of these advanced stats show the Cardinals as being a poor defensive team but watching them I just don't see it. I've never had a worry about the fielding capability of this roster and, aside from Jay's crappy outfield arm, I just don't see it as this big liability that some of these stats say it is. We will see if their limited range in the OF will end up hurting them, but with the number of ground balls the pitching staff gets opposing hitters to hit, I love how solid the infield is both in terms of fielding and in particular in turning the double play.

ETA--I think what's going to be fascinating to watch is how the Boston bats fare against the Cards pitchers. StL had the 2nd best ground ball % and ground ball/fly ball % in the league behind only Pittsburgh and I believe 3rd best in HR allowed. Boston is the exact opposite coming in with a league leading slugging %. Which of these will win out?

The interesting thing is that if you look at team's pitching stats, the top teams in GB/FB ratio are all NL teams. The two best AL teams were Seattle and Detroit and were ranked ~10th in that stat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?

 
"Good said:
3) Ellsbury or Victorino having anything resembling a green light is just utter and complete tactical negligence. The break-even rate for steals to have a positive effect on one's offense is 75%. Nobody's really been able to sniff that against Molina
I cant find individual stolen base data, but I would just about guarantee there is some player(s) that have had a greater than 75% success rate against Molina.However, I dont imagine that the Sox will be running much at all against him. And if so, it will be more targeted towards pitchers that are slow to the mound
It isn't so much that Molina throws runners out, but that teams don't even bother trying anymore. Opponents only stole 26 bases on Molina all season. I'm sure you will be able to find someone who was 2-for-2 stealing on Molina, but WGAF?
Correct. SB percentage is extremely misleading, because when a guy gains a reputation for being good at throwing out baserunners, people tend to run less. And the ones who do run are usually only the most elite basestealers. So if your CS% drops from 45% to 30%, it might appear you got a lot worse. But if you're throwing out 30% of the best base stealers in the league, that's pretty awesome.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Well, there's the RL platoon advantage against the Cardinals' right handed rotation.

 
Some of you folks sound jealous or something with all your Yankees hatred. Every team has dooshy fans. New York probably has more than most, but they also have a huge following of intelligent, interested, dedicated die hards that follow the team from around the globe (and that contingent is probably the largest of any fan base).
Fixed to represent any Yankee fan, circa 2000-2009. It's what happens when your team gets good. You acquire a bunch of bandwagoners, which brings the overall quality of your fans down a peg or five.
It goes without saying that Boston has a bunch of bandwagon fans. Pats fans tripled after the 2001 season.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Well, there's the RL platoon advantage against the Cardinals' right handed rotation.
That's the strongest pro-Ortiz argument, IMO. If you're bringing Ortiz off the bench to pinch-hit, it's probably in an important enough situation for the Cardinals to bring in Siegrist or Choate to face him.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.
Boston fans are known to be forgiving of defensive mistakes late in games at 1B as long as the guy is a good hitter.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.
Boston fans are known to be forgiving of defensive mistakes late in games at 1B as long as the guy is a good hitter.
Ouch.

 
That was almost funny. Would have worked better had Buckner actually been a good hitter in 86. And he was especially terrible in the playoffs. He batted .214, with 0 walks, and 4 RBI in the 14 games played

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.
Boston fans are known to be forgiving of defensive mistakes late in games at 1B as long as the guy is a good hitter.
Ouch.
You really think Sox fans are still lamenting 1986 after '04 & '07?

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.
Boston fans are known to be forgiving of defensive mistakes late in games at 1B as long as the guy is a good hitter.
Ouch.
You really think Sox fans are still lamenting 1986 after '04 & '07?
I still lament 1995, 2001, and 2004 even after 09. Tough losses are still tough, even if good stuff happens later. Maybe lament is a strong word, but it's still frustrating for different reasons. In 95, I wanted Mattingly to win. In 01, there was the 9/11 connection to NYC and the end of the run with that core of guys. And 04 saw the end of the curse. 2009 was a ton of fun and I was there for every playoff game, but it won't get Donnie Baseball a ring or bring back the curse. 2004 was insane for a Sox fan, but there are plenty of folks who didn't live to see that who thought 86 was their chance, plenty of players on the 86 team that never got a chance for redemption, etc. I can see it.

:shrug:

 
Kurkjian on SVP is always fun. Van Pelt needs to hit him with Cardinals secret weapon, third-base coach Jose Oquendo.

SVP: "If you threw all the starters in this series into a draft, would any of the Red Sox starters go before Wainwright and Wacha?"

TK (in a nutshell): "Nope"

But can they hit Lester and can they get quality starts from the other 2?

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.
Boston fans are known to be forgiving of defensive mistakes late in games at 1B as long as the guy is a good hitter.
Ouch.
You really think Sox fans are still lamenting 1986 after '04 & '07?
I still lament 1995, 2001, and 2004 even after 09. Tough losses are still tough, even if good stuff happens later. Maybe lament is a strong word, but it's still frustrating for different reasons. In 95, I wanted Mattingly to win. In 01, there was the 9/11 connection to NYC and the end of the run with that core of guys. And 04 saw the end of the curse. 2009 was a ton of fun and I was there for every playoff game, but it won't get Donnie Baseball a ring or bring back the curse. 2004 was insane for a Sox fan, but there are plenty of folks who didn't live to see that who thought 86 was their chance, plenty of players on the 86 team that never got a chance for redemption, etc. I can see it.

:shrug:
'03 was the worst for me. In '86, we played a team that won nearly a hundred games. In '03, we -- IMO -- were just a better club than the Yanks, and we hadn't been that in a long, long time. It's why '99 is a blip on the screen. The Yanks were better that year, no question. But '03 ? Oh, that hurt.

 
For our Red Sox trying to pass himself off as a stat geek... Boston was right on the league average this season taking extra bases on balls in play. If you want to argue Holliday's limited range and Jay's weak arm will help the Sox take an extra base or two, fine. But don't argue that this was a pre-existing strength or a big factor in Boston's success - they scored a ton of runs because they got on base a lot, and the impact their ability to manufacture runs has on winning games has been greatly overstated in this thread.
I argued that the team speed combined with the lead-pants outfield of STL was going to result in extra bases. I never stated that trumped their on ability to get on base a ton (which I also mentioned). Sox baserunning strengths are in stolen bases (Top SBR in MLB), and to a lesser degree stretching out 1st-3rd and 2nd-Home (aka HAR) which they are good but not great at (13th in MLB). They don't even try to take extra bases on balls on the ground (which would be balls hit to STL's only + Defensive players).

Bottom line, the situations BOS likes to take extra bases happens to mesh perfectly with the largest weakness in STLs defense. If you don't think that will be a factor at some point, possibly deciding a game or two, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is fine. :shrug:

I'm not saying this is the be all end all... I pointed this stuff out as one of many factors where Boston could have an advantage over the Cardinals.

 
That was almost funny. Would have worked better had Buckner actually been a good hitter in 86. And he was especially terrible in the playoffs. He batted .214, with 0 walks, and 4 RBI in the 14 games played
Ortiz is hitting .200 this postseason. :shrug:
How many AB's vs LHP has he had?

How many AB's vs LHP will he have against the Cards?

His AVG drops 80 points and OPS drops 360pts against LHP this season.

 
But can they hit Lester and can they get quality starts from the other 2?
IMO Games 3 and 4 could be managed LaRussa style to grind out wins. If Kelly/Lynn have the game in the 6th inning by Ortiz's third plate appearance, Matheny can bring in Choate to pitch to Papi and possibly finish the sixth. Then if the RH flamethrowers can get through a lap, Siegrist can come in for Ortiz's fourth PA, and hopefully the team is in a position for Rosenthal to pitch the ninth.This approach would put a lot of pressure on Wainwright to pitch deep into Game 5, but it could work.

 
That was almost funny. Would have worked better had Buckner actually been a good hitter in 86. And he was especially terrible in the playoffs. He batted .214, with 0 walks, and 4 RBI in the 14 games played
Ortiz is hitting .200 this postseason. :shrug:
How many AB's vs LHP has he had? How many AB's vs LHP will he have against the Cards?

His AVG drops 80 points and OPS drops 360pts against LHP this season.
Take it up with moops. :shrug: He's the one who said .214 was bad.
 
For our Red Sox trying to pass himself off as a stat geek... Boston was right on the league average this season taking extra bases on balls in play. If you want to argue Holliday's limited range and Jay's weak arm will help the Sox take an extra base or two, fine. But don't argue that this was a pre-existing strength or a big factor in Boston's success - they scored a ton of runs because they got on base a lot, and the impact their ability to manufacture runs has on winning games has been greatly overstated in this thread.
I argued that the team speed combined with the lead-pants outfield of STL was going to result in extra bases. I never stated that trumped their on ability to get on base a ton (which I also mentioned). Sox baserunning strengths are in stolen bases (Top SBR in MLB), and to a lesser degree stretching out 1st-3rd and 2nd-Home (aka HAR) which they are good but not great at (13th in MLB). They don't even try to take extra bases on balls on the ground (which would be balls hit to STL's only + Defensive players).

Bottom line, the situations BOS likes to take extra bases happens to mesh perfectly with the largest weakness in STLs defense. If you don't think that will be a factor at some point, possibly deciding a game or two, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is fine. :shrug:

I'm not saying this is the be all end all... I pointed this stuff out as one of many factors where Boston could have an advantage over the Cardinals.
There's no way you wrote that cut-and-paste job. The author of this post doesn't understand what the author of that other one was saying.

 
For our Red Sox trying to pass himself off as a stat geek... Boston was right on the league average this season taking extra bases on balls in play. If you want to argue Holliday's limited range and Jay's weak arm will help the Sox take an extra base or two, fine. But don't argue that this was a pre-existing strength or a big factor in Boston's success - they scored a ton of runs because they got on base a lot, and the impact their ability to manufacture runs has on winning games has been greatly overstated in this thread.
I argued that the team speed combined with the lead-pants outfield of STL was going to result in extra bases. I never stated that trumped their on ability to get on base a ton (which I also mentioned). Sox baserunning strengths are in stolen bases (Top SBR in MLB), and to a lesser degree stretching out 1st-3rd and 2nd-Home (aka HAR) which they are good but not great at (13th in MLB). They don't even try to take extra bases on balls on the ground (which would be balls hit to STL's only + Defensive players).

Bottom line, the situations BOS likes to take extra bases happens to mesh perfectly with the largest weakness in STLs defense. If you don't think that will be a factor at some point, possibly deciding a game or two, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. Which is fine. :shrug:

I'm not saying this is the be all end all... I pointed this stuff out as one of many factors where Boston could have an advantage over the Cardinals.
There's no way you wrote that cut-and-paste job. The author of this post doesn't understand what the author of that other one was saying.
I wrote both posts and have a perfectly clear understanding of what Im saying in both.

 
That was almost funny. Would have worked better had Buckner actually been a good hitter in 86. And he was especially terrible in the playoffs. He batted .214, with 0 walks, and 4 RBI in the 14 games played
Ortiz is hitting .200 this postseason. :shrug:
How many AB's vs LHP has he had? How many AB's vs LHP will he have against the Cards?

His AVG drops 80 points and OPS drops 360pts against LHP this season.
Take it up with moops. :shrug: He's the one who said .214 was bad.
Sorry juggling a bunch of crap and mistakenly thought your post was tied into the "ortiz / napoli" debate. Skimmed the moops post apparently. My bad on that one. :lol:

 
rockaction said:
A competent manager wouldn't put Ortiz at 1B. I forgot we were dealing with Farrell. My bad.
I'm not a huge fan of Farrell's decision so far this playoffs but you are an idiot if you think Papi should sit the 3 games in St. Louis
At DH, Ortiz is clearly the better option than Napoli.

At 1B, Ortiz and Napoli are pretty much a wash.

Ortiz's WAR was 4.4 this season, while Napoli's 4.1. Since we're pretty sure Ortiz is sub-replacement-level in the field, Ortiz's WAR would have dropped had he played in the field at any position for a significant period of time.

Playing Ortiz at 1B over Napoli introduces a much higher defensive risk than any advantage gained at the plate. In a series where Boston has the advantage on paper, why introduce variance that can otherwise be avoided?
Because the games are not played on a spreadsheet and yours might need updating even if it was because in his last 32 games at 1B, he has a total of 1 error which was back in 2009. Ortiz is their best hitter and has a history of postseason clutch performances, he is going to play at least 2 games in St. Louis and Farrell would be run out of town if Papi played any less.
Boston fans are known to be forgiving of defensive mistakes late in games at 1B as long as the guy is a good hitter.
Ouch.
You really think Sox fans are still lamenting 1986 after '04 & '07?
I still lament 1995, 2001, and 2004 even after 09. Tough losses are still tough, even if good stuff happens later. Maybe lament is a strong word, but it's still frustrating for different reasons. In 95, I wanted Mattingly to win. In 01, there was the 9/11 connection to NYC and the end of the run with that core of guys. And 04 saw the end of the curse. 2009 was a ton of fun and I was there for every playoff game, but it won't get Donnie Baseball a ring or bring back the curse. 2004 was insane for a Sox fan, but there are plenty of folks who didn't live to see that who thought 86 was their chance, plenty of players on the 86 team that never got a chance for redemption, etc. I can see it.

:shrug:
'03 was the worst for me. In '86, we played a team that won nearly a hundred games. In '03, we -- IMO -- were just a better club than the Yanks, and we hadn't been that in a long, long time. It's why '99 is a blip on the screen. The Yanks were better that year, no question. But '03 ? Oh, that hurt.
86's misery has a special place in my heart but the 03 loss & 2010 Bruins loss to the Flyers were cold hard kick in the nuts pain

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
[icon] said:
That was almost funny. Would have worked better had Buckner actually been a good hitter in 86. And he was especially terrible in the playoffs. He batted .214, with 0 walks, and 4 RBI in the 14 games played
Ortiz is hitting .200 this postseason. :shrug:
How many AB's vs LHP has he had? How many AB's vs LHP will he have against the Cards?

His AVG drops 80 points and OPS drops 360pts against LHP this season.
Take it up with moops. :shrug: He's the one who said .214 was bad.
He was a terrible hitter all year and didn't hit a pretty big grand slam in the ALCS.

If you want to compare Buckner and Ortiz, go for it.

 
Bruce Dickinson said:
[icon] said:
That was almost funny. Would have worked better had Buckner actually been a good hitter in 86. And he was especially terrible in the playoffs. He batted .214, with 0 walks, and 4 RBI in the 14 games played
Ortiz is hitting .200 this postseason. :shrug:
How many AB's vs LHP has he had? How many AB's vs LHP will he have against the Cards?

His AVG drops 80 points and OPS drops 360pts against LHP this season.
Take it up with moops. :shrug: He's the one who said .214 was bad.
He was a terrible hitter all year and didn't hit a pretty big grand slam in the ALCS.If you want to compare Buckner and Ortiz, go for it.
The apt comparison actually involves Don Baylor, but it's game day and there's no need to bring up 1986 again.

 
Heard a pundit yesterday previewing the Series. Curious how well some of his claims hold up to the actual numbers:

Boston's rep as fastball-mashers comes from their ability to get into a lot of hitter's counts and facing average fastballs in those counts. The list of Cardinals pitchers with fastballs in the 90-92 range is pretty short.

The way Boston beats good starting pitching is by grinding out at-bats, running up pitch counts, and teeing off on middle relievers. Detroit's rotation is fantastic, but Boston was able to endure it and get to Detroit's average bullpen - more than half the runs they scored in the ALCS were off Tigers relievers. The Cardinals don't have an average bullpen; their middle relievers are a bit above average.

Boston had the best stolen base success rate in American League history this season, and was able to use stolen bases as a weapon at a comparable rate of attempts and success against the Tampa and Detroit catchers. Stolen bases won't be a big factor on either side in the World Series because the Cardinals don't run much and Cardinals opponents don't run on Molina.

ETA: Molina's rep as a stolen base killer helps the Cards turn more double plays, since they can get away with throwing more off-speed and breaking stuff with runners on first than other teams can, increasing the chances of getting ground balls in those situations.

The Cardinals pitchers have an unusually high ground ball rate for a staff filled with plus fastballs. Wainwright induces a lot of double plays because his breaking stuff is so nasty, but Wacha's changeup is good enough to get bad swings and ground balls, Lynn gets grounders when he's on, and the bullpen is good at keeping the ball down and in the ballpark.

People agonizing over Ortiz vs Napoli at first base in the NL parks are missing the real story. Whether it's Ortiz or Napoli isn't as big a deal as the fact that one of them will have to sit. Ortiz is getting 1B is St Louis because he hits RHP so much better than he hits lefties, but he will miss not having Napoli behind him, and Boston's grinding philosophy will miss not having their best grinder - Napoli saw about four and a half pitches per plate appearance this year, one of the best rates in the league and standing out even on a patient lineup like the Red Sox.

Allen Craig will be a big lift even if he's not 100% because of his hitting approach. He doesn't give away many at-bats, so even if World Series Craig is a singles/doubles hitter instead of a power threat, he will be a big help for Adams and Molina in that section of the batting order.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Heard a pundit yesterday previewing the Series. Curious how well some of his claims hold up to the actual numbers:

Boston's rep as fastball-mashers comes from their ability to get into a lot of hitter's counts and facing average fastballs in those counts. The list of Cardinals pitchers with fastballs in the 90-92 range is pretty short.

The way Boston beats good starting pitching is by grinding out at-bats, running up pitch counts, and teeing off on middle relievers. Detroit's rotation is fantastic, but Boston was able to endure it and get to Detroit's average bullpen - more than half thrums they scored in the ALCS were off Tigers relievers. The Cardinals don't have an average bullpen; their middle relievers are a bit above average.

Boston had the best stolen base success rate in American League history this season, and was able to use stolen bases as a weapon at a comparable rate of attempts and success against the Tampa and Detroit catchers. Stolen bases won't be a big factor on either side in the World Series because the Cardinals don't run much and Cardinals opponents don't run on Molina.

ETA: Molina's rep as a stolen base killer helps the Cards turn more double plays, since they can get away with throwing more off-speed and breaking stuff with runners on first than other teams can, increasing the chances of getting ground balls in those situations.

The Cardinals pitchers have an unusually high ground ball rate for a staff filled with plus fastballs. Wainwright induces a lot of double plays because his breaking stuff is so nasty, but Wacha's changeup is good enough to get bad swings and ground balls, Lynn gets grounders when he's on, and the bullpen is good at keeping the ball down and in the ballpark.

People agonizing over Ortiz vs Napoli at first base in the NL parks are missing the real story. Whether it's Ortiz or Napoli isn't as big a deal as the fact that one of them will have to sit. Ortiz is getting 1B is St Louis because he hits RHP so much better than he hits lefties, but he will miss not having Napoli behind him, and Boston's grinding philosophy will miss not having their best grinder - Napoli saw about four and a half pitches per plate appearance this year, one of the best rates in the league and standing out even on a patient lineup like the Red Sox.

Allen Craig will be a big lift even if he's not 100% because of his hitting approach. He doesn't give away many at-bats, so even if World Series Craig is a singles/doubles hitter instead of a power threat, he will be a big help for Adams and Molina in that section of the batting order.
:unsure: This was what I was thinking. We lose at least one of those guys, and they're our 4-5 guys.

 
What a colossal ####up not starting this last night. Now they will be head to head with football on 4 nights.

 
The Red Sox and Cardinals will play game one of the World Series on Wednesday. Unfortunately for Major League Baseball, this is one day later than it should have started and the impact on the television ratings will be huge.If the World Series goes seven games, four of the games will compete head-to-head with an NFL game, a fifth game will go up against college football games, and game seven would compete with a major holiday in which people leave their houses at night (Halloween).
That's a formula for a ratings disaster.

On the other hand, if MLB had started the season and the World Series just one day earlier (see right), only one game would have gone head-to-head with the NFL, one game would go up against college football, and game seven would have been the day before Halloween.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top