The Official 2011 Sox rant thread:

[chicowalker]

Youk in Boston with a hernia and now Lackey is out with a calf injury. this is getting rediculous. We will be embarassed in the playoffs

Is it a hernia? On the broadcast tonight they said he was getting an MRI on his hip.

 

[ausbacker]

Well, I'm the one of the 2 of us who actually offered facts. You, otoh, are just getting defensive and insisting you're reight. Until you offer some facts to demonstrate why I'm wrong, "pain in the arse" and "argumentative" are better descriptions of you.

There's over $250mm invested in the rotation. Spending money simply isn't the problem, sorry.

If you want to argue that the problem is spending on the pen, compare what our pen costs to what other, better pens cost.

You're not offering facts, you're offering opinions. Dice-K has been a write off for basically the entire season. At his best he's a fantastic pitcher, overall inconsistent. Bucholz is an up and coming gun pitcher who's injury prone and is on a reasonable contract.

Red Sox Salaries

[B]Offense[/B]
[U]Catchers[/U]
Saltalamacchia   750,000
Varitek        2,000,000

[U]Infield[/U]
Aviles           640,000
Gonzalez       6,300,000
Jackson         3,200,00
Lowrie           450,000
Pedroia        5,750,000
Scutaro        5,500,000
Youkilis      12,250,000

[U]Outfield[/U]
Crawford      14,857,143
Ellsbury       2,400,000
McDonald         470,000
Reddick              N/A

[U]Designated Hitter[/U]
Ortiz         12,500,000

Injuried/Disabled
Drew          14,000,000

[B]Defense[/B]
[U]Starters[/U]
Beckett       17,000,000
Bedard         1,000,000
Lackey        15,950,000
Lester         5,750,000
Miller               N/A
Wakefield      2,000,000

[U]Injured/Disabled List[/U]
Bucholz          550,000
Matsuzaka     10,000,000

[U]Pen[/U]
Aceves               N/A
Albers           875,000
Bard             505,000
Dubrount         417,000
Morales          424,000
Wheeler        3,000,000

[U]Closer[/U]
Papelbon      12,000,000

Given that the Red Sox have suffered with injuries and have had spotty starting pitching for a while now, the investment in bats far outweighs the investment in pitching. Our pen looks to be bargain basement prices. We're getting bargain basement pitching from the pen. I accept injuries are part of the game but as captain insano has mentioned, it's the same thing year in year out.

• The contract I like is Bucholz's moving forward. That said, it all counts for naught if he's off again on again injured.
• Beckett & Lester are our guns.
• As mentioned earlier, Dice-K fantastic when on (but how often is that).
• Miller is meh
• Bedard has pitched reasonably well and I can see him being a nice pick up. Lackey is a massive flop.
• Aceves has been a very good pick up.
• Albers & Wheeler.. well what do you say?

 

[chicowalker]

You're not offering facts, you're offering opinions....

No, I offered facts. I presented the contracts of the pitchers in our rotation. That isn't opinion.

If you want to claim the problem is spending, show me how much more other teams are spending on their pitching than the $250+ the Sox have committed just to (part of) their rotation.

...Dice-K has been a write off for basically the entire season. At his best he's a fantastic pitcher, overall inconsistent. Bucholz is an up and coming gun pitcher who's injury prone and is on a reasonable contract....

These are opinions, and they're irrelevant to the spending point.

(I happen to agree generally about DiceK, though I'd be more negative. I don't think Buchholz deserves the label injury prone. he's a young pitcher who has missed most of the year due to an injury, a bit like Ellsbury last year. (Somebody like Bedard is injury prone, to say the least))

......Given that the Red Sox have suffered with injuries and have had spotty starting pitching for a while now, the investment in bats far outweighs the investment in pitching. ....

Going off your table -- now you've presented facts, by the way -- it looks like roughly $80mm is being spent on 15 non-pitchers, for an average of $5.3mm each. approx $70mm is being spent on 15 pitchers, for an average of $4.7mm each

In a vaccuum, I'm not sure those #s really tell us much, but on the face of it they're fairly even. It's certainly not something you can consider far outweighing.

......Our pen looks to be bargain basement prices. We're getting bargain basement pitching from the pen. I accept injuries are part of the game but as captain insano has mentioned, it's the same thing year in year out....

I would guess most pens are at bargain basement prices. Aside from many closers and some setup men, most relief pitchers aren't very good and aren't very reliable.

Unless other teams are spending much more, and getting something out of it, the Sox not spending much on the pen doesn't indicate a faulty strategy.

(By the way, several years ago I thought a good strategy might in fact be to "overload" one's bullpen. My thought was to pay market prices for the best guys out there for a few years, thinking they may be an undervalued commodity. I actually tracked it for a few years in a row. Would have been a disaster, on the surface at least. turns out many set up men and relievers who shine for a year or 2 then completely fall apart. It may be overuse, maybe they end up being given more responsiblity than they can handle, maybe they're just not that good -- probably all of the above.)

 

[captain insano]

ive never seen a more injury prone team in my life. and I've been watching the sox for a long time. its the curse of the lowrie. they need new strength and conditioning coaches[something] because you cant just attribute this to bad luck anymore because it just keeps happening over and over again. guys like youk are gonna get hurt no matter what. he plays ultra hard all the time. i love the guy. as he gets older it will only get worse. beckett has always been fragile no matter how many innings he gets in during a year. his performance suffers and he wears down all the time late in the year. lowrie is just a joke. sneeze with in a foot of him and hes on the dl. then there's jd drew. see ya don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out the door. did i miss anybody?

 

[chicowalker]

ive never seen a more injury prone team in my life. and ive been watching the sox for a long time. its the curse of the lowrie.

feels that way.

Sounds like the Giants this year have really been killed, though. Or maybe my friends are just whiners

 

[IcyPatriot]

Seems like we are more injury prone but I think the real issue is that the cupboard is pretty bare with replacement players. There is a huge divide between the parent club and the farm system.

Some time ago Theo had it that the AA system was for the future stars and the AAA system was more like 4A type players. Perhaps that is still the case but the farm is a bit weak on the replacements and still strong on the future stars. Even on the farm system the injuries have been many. Better training and more ways to build muscle naturally but perhaps it's still creating too much stress on other parts of the body. We are not built to be stronger all the way around.

 

[chicowalker]

Seems like we are more injury prone but I think the real issue is that the cupboard is pretty bare with replacement players. There is a huge divide between the parent club and the farm system.

Some time ago Theo had it that the AA system was for the future stars and the AAA system was more like 4A type players. Perhaps that is still the case but the farm is a bit weak on the replacements and still strong on the future stars. Even on the farm system the injuries have been many. Better training and more ways to build muscle naturally but perhaps it's still creating too much stress on other parts of the body. We are not built to be stronger all the way around.

Do you think that's much different from most teams, though? (most good teams, anyway)

 

[Boston Boxer]

Is it a hernia? On the broadcast tonight they said he was getting an MRI on his hip.

they are saying its bursitis, but i dont trust the Red Sox medical staff at all.

 

[ausbacker]

No, I offered facts. I presented the contracts of the pitchers in our rotation. That isn't opinion.

If you want to claim the problem is spending, show me how much more other teams are spending on their pitching than the $250+ the Sox have committed just to (part of) their rotation.

These are opinions, and they're irrelevant to the spending point.

(I happen to agree generally about DiceK, though I'd be more negative. I don't think Buchholz deserves the label injury prone. he's a young pitcher who has missed most of the year due to an injury, a bit like Ellsbury last year. (Somebody like Bedard is injury prone, to say the least))

Going off your table -- now you've presented facts, by the way -- it looks like roughly $80mm is being spent on 15 non-pitchers, for an average of $5.3mm each. approx $70mm is being spent on 15 pitchers, for an average of $4.7mm each

In a vaccuum, I'm not sure those #s really tell us much, but on the face of it they're fairly even. It's certainly not something you can consider far outweighing.

I would guess most pens are at bargain basement prices. Aside from many closers and some setup men, most relief pitchers aren't very good and aren't very reliable.

Unless other teams are spending much more, and getting something out of it, the Sox not spending much on the pen doesn't indicate a faulty strategy.

(By the way, several years ago I thought a good strategy might in fact be to "overload" one's bullpen. My thought was to pay market prices for the best guys out there for a few years, thinking they may be an undervalued commodity. I actually tracked it for a few years in a row. Would have been a disaster, on the surface at least. turns out many set up men and relievers who shine for a year or 2 then completely fall apart. It may be overuse, maybe they end up being given more responsiblity than they can handle, maybe they're just not that good -- probably all of the above.)

You're welcome to those opinions chico but the proof is in the pudding both offensively and defensively.

 

[chicowalker]

You're welcome to those opinions chico but the proof is in the pudding both offensively and defensively.

I don't think you understand the difference between an opinion and a fact.

 

[ausbacker]

I don't think you understand the difference between an opinion and a fact.

I am certain that I understand the difference between you offering opinions, facts and your very public and rather egotistical need for the last word when someone disagrees with your opinion.

The Red Sox rankings offensively and defensively coupled with the spending spread in key positions is all I need to see.

 

[chicowalker]

I am certain that I understand the difference between you offering opinions, facts and your very public and rather egotistical need for the last word when someone disagrees with your opinion.
....

All you're doing is again demonstrating just how hypocritical you are when call somebody else a pain in the ass and argumentative.

Disagree with my opinions all you want. You can't disagree with the facts I presented, which is why you failed to address them.

...The Red Sox rankings offensively and defensively coupled with the spending spread in key positions is all I need to see.

I'm sure it is all you need to see, but that's simply because you don't know how to make or analyze an argument.

You've still failed to support you original claim re spending.

and after how many posts and words? As you said -- pain in the ass and argumentative.

 

[ausbacker]

All you're doing is again demonstrating just how hypocritical you are when call somebody else a pain in the ass and argumentative.

Disagree with my opinions all you want. You can't disagree with the facts I presented, which is why you failed to address them.


I'm sure it is all you need to see, but that's simply because you don't know how to make or analyze an argument.

You've still failed to support you original claim re spending.

and after how many posts and words? As you said -- pain in the ass and argumentative.

You offered your opinions and I offered mine to counteract them. I supported my claim in regards to spending, you just didn't like it.

You don't agree much in the same that I don't agree with your general point of view. That's fine given I know your general method of response is "I'm right you're wrong because I use facts and you use opinions".

I already know what your response is going to be so don't bother.

 

[chicowalker]

You offered your opinions and I offered mine to counteract them. I supported my claim in regards to spending, you just didn't like it.

You don't agree much in the same that I don't agree with your general point of view. That's fine given I know your general method of response is "I'm right you're wrong because I use facts and you use opinions".

I already know what your response is going to be so don't bother.

You did not support your claim.


I wrote: "...If you want to claim the problem is spending, show me how much more other teams are spending on their pitching than the $250+ the Sox have committed just to (part of) their rotation..."

your response: none


I wrote: "...Going off your table -- now you've presented facts, by the way -- it looks like roughly $80mm is being spent on 15 non-pitchers, for an average of $5.3mm each. approx $70mm is being spent on 15 pitchers, for an average of $4.7mm each

In a vaccuum, I'm not sure those #s really tell us much, but on the face of it they're fairly even. It's certainly not something you can consider far outweighing..."

your response: none


I wrote: "...I would guess most pens are at bargain basement prices. Aside from many closers and some setup men, most relief pitchers aren't very good and aren't very reliable.

Unless other teams are spending much more, and getting something out of it, the Sox not spending much on the pen doesn't indicate a faulty strategy..."

your response: none

 

[ausbacker]

You did not support your claim.

I wrote: "...If you want to claim the problem is spending, show me how much more other teams are spending on their pitching than the $250+ the Sox have committed just to (part of) their rotation..."

your response: none

I wrote: "...Going off your table -- now you've presented facts, by the way -- it looks like roughly $80mm is being spent on 15 non-pitchers, for an average of $5.3mm each. approx $70mm is being spent on 15 pitchers, for an average of $4.7mm each

In a vaccuum, I'm not sure those #s really tell us much, but on the face of it they're fairly even. It's certainly not something you can consider far outweighing..."

your response: none

I wrote: "...I would guess most pens are at bargain basement prices. Aside from many closers and some setup men, most relief pitchers aren't very good and aren't very reliable.

Unless other teams are spending much more, and getting something out of it, the Sox not spending much on the pen doesn't indicate a faulty strategy..."

your response: none

Here's a thought, instead of asking people to do YOUR work for you how about YOU provide all of the DATA YOU ASKED FOR. All 29 of them (outside of the Sox of course).

I'm comfortable in the knowledge/data I presented regarding Red Sox spending and that comparative basis given dollars committed against other Major League clubs.

 

[chicowalker]

Here's a thought, instead of asking people to do YOUR work for you how about YOU provide all of the DATA YOU ASKED FOR. All 29 of them (outside of the Sox of course).

I'm comfortable in the knowledge/data I presented regarding Red Sox spending and that comparative basis given dollars committed against other Major League clubs.

Yet another non-response.

Like I said, it appears you really don't know the difference b/t fact and opinion. You made the claim, you should be able to support it. It's not "my work" to support your argument.

You did present the Sox spending (as did I). But without context, as I've now pointed out to you twice, it's pretty meaningless.

re the bold: Did I miss something? What comparative spending data did you provide? If you did present relevant data that offers that context and I missed it, I will gladly apologize. Unlike some folks, I have no problem admitting when I've made a mistake.

 

[ausbacker]

I made a claim about the Red Sox spending. I supported it. You decided you wanted to go off on a tangent. It's YOUR job to counteract that with other references given YOU made the claim about the SPENDING STRATEGY in regards to OTHER CLUBS, the Red Sox, the pen and pitching.

Once more, I'll start off your job given your pseudo-intellectual approach and general laziness.

As a starting comparison, here's the Phillies pitching staff, as referenced by USA Today.

Roy Halladay	 $ 20,000,000	
Roy Oswalt	 $ 16,000,000	
Brad Lidge	 $ 12,000,000	
Cliff Lee	 $ 11,000,000	
Joe Blanton	 $ 10,500,000	
Cole Hamels	 $ 9,500,000	
Ryan Madson	 $ 4,833,333	
Danys Baez	 $ 2,750,000	
Jose Contreras	 $ 2,500,000	
Kyle Kendrick	 $ 2,450,000	
J.C. Romero	 $ 1,350,000	
David Herndon	 $ 425,000	
Antonio Bastardo $ 419,000	
Brian Schlitter	 $ 414,000

This is quite a good site to have a look at committed salaries in 2011. I'm unsure if it's up to date in nature.

 

[chicowalker]

I made a claim about the Red Sox spending. I supported it. You decided you wanted to go off on a tangent. It's YOUR job to counteract that with other references given YOU made the claim about the SPENDING STRATEGY in regards to OTHER CLUBS, the Red Sox, the pen and pitching.

Once more, I'll start off your job given your pseudo-intellectual approach and general laziness.

As a starting comparison, here's the Phillies pitching staff, as referenced by USA Today.

Roy Halladay	 $ 20,000,000	
Roy Oswalt	 $ 16,000,000	
Brad Lidge	 $ 12,000,000	
Cliff Lee	 $ 11,000,000	
Joe Blanton	 $ 10,500,000	
Cole Hamels	 $ 9,500,000	
Ryan Madson	 $ 4,833,333	
Danys Baez	 $ 2,750,000	
Jose Contreras	 $ 2,500,000	
Kyle Kendrick	 $ 2,450,000	
J.C. Romero	 $ 1,350,000	
David Herndon	 $ 425,000	
Antonio Bastardo $ 419,000	
Brian Schlitter	 $ 414,000

This is quite a good site to have a look at committed salaries in 2011. I'm unsure if it's up to date in nature.

Nothing I said was on a tangent.

The fact that you continually resort to ad hominems demonstrates not only how weak your argument is but also the kind of person you are.

I'm assuming, since you're just presenting this data now, that you didn't present it before -- despite your claim that you did. Don't worry, I don't expect you to own up to it -- that would be contrary to your m.o.

But, hey, great, you've finally provided some facts that give us a context for your claim. Well done!

The phils have about $93mm committed to pitching this year. Using the same source, the Sox have about $77mm committed to pitching.

So the Phils are outspending the Sox on pitching this year. Not shocking, given that the Phils are the dominant team and have a great rotation.

Let's take a look at the team with the next lowest ERA - SF:

Tim Lincecum $ 14,000,000 Pitcher
Matt Cain $ 7,333,333 Pitcher
Brian Wilson $ 6,500,000 Pitcher
Jonathan Sanchez $ 4,800,000 Pitcher
Jeremy Affeldt $ 4,500,000 Pitcher
Javier Lopez $ 2,375,000 Pitcher
Ramon S. Ramirez $ 1,650,000 Pitcher
Santiago Casilla $ 1,300,000 Pitcher
Guillermo Mota $ 925,000 Pitcher
Madison Bumgarner $ 450,000 Pitcher
Sergio Romo $ 450,000 Pitcher
Dan Runzler $ 418,500 Pitcher

Total spending approx $63mm -- pretty much the same amount less than the Sox as the Sox are less than the Phils.

Next in ERA is the Braves. Spending? approx $40mm

So the Sox are being outspent by the Phils while outspending the Giants and nearly doubling the Braves' spending.

Doesn't that tell you that perhaps the problem isn't simply how much they're spending on pitching?

 

[ausbacker]

Nothing I said was on a tangent.

The fact that you continually resort to ad hominems demonstrates not only how weak your argument is but also the kind of person you are.

I'm assuming, since you're just presenting this data now, that you didn't present it before -- despite your claim that you did. Don't worry, I don't expect you to own up to it -- that would be contrary to your m.o.

But, hey, great, you've finally provided some facts that give us a context for your claim. Well done!

The phils have about $93mm committed to pitching this year. Using the same source, the Sox have about $77mm committed to pitching.

So the Phils are outspending the Sox on pitching this year. Not shocking, given that the Phils are the dominant team and have a great rotation.

Let's take a look at the team with the next lowest ERA - SF:

Tim Lincecum $ 14,000,000 Pitcher
Matt Cain $ 7,333,333 Pitcher
Brian Wilson $ 6,500,000 Pitcher
Jonathan Sanchez $ 4,800,000 Pitcher
Jeremy Affeldt $ 4,500,000 Pitcher
Javier Lopez $ 2,375,000 Pitcher
Ramon S. Ramirez $ 1,650,000 Pitcher
Santiago Casilla $ 1,300,000 Pitcher
Guillermo Mota $ 925,000 Pitcher
Madison Bumgarner $ 450,000 Pitcher
Sergio Romo $ 450,000 Pitcher
Dan Runzler $ 418,500 Pitcher

Total spending approx $63mm -- pretty much the same amount less than the Sox as the Sox are less than the Phils.

Next in ERA is the Braves. Spending? approx $40mm

So the Sox are being outspent by the Phils while outspending the Giants and nearly doubling the Braves' spending.

Doesn't that tell you that perhaps the problem isn't simply how much they're spending on pitching?

Thanks for going to some effort that at least presents something worthy of rebuttal. I agree that a large issue is that the Red Sox don't appear to be excellent evaluators of pitching talent when it comes to the bull pen. Given the money the Sox spend compared to other teams, do you not acknowledge that better performing pitchers could be purchased, or at the very least better identified? Do you reject or support that recently, the Sox have been outspending on offense knowing that pitching has been an issue (especially health) more recently? I was unwise to challenge captain insano on this point when he identified it a long time ago (and have subsequently corrected myself and apologized to him).

Lackey's a monumental bust which has warped our structure. Bucholz numbers go up in the future which is fine (apart from the injuries he has GUN written all over him). I'm happy with Beckett, Lester & Bucholz assuming injury status as our three guns. The rest, fill in at your leisure.

Feel free to make assertions about my personality type. I'm not the lazy poster charging other people to do his work for him then having a sook about it. Feel free to challenge my opinions as that's what threads and forums are for, but go about it with some effort.

 

[chicowalker]

Thanks for going to some effort that at least present something worthy of rebuttal.....

Sadly, that already was done -- several posts ago, yesterday. You've finally recognized it, and that's progress. Kudos!

... I agree that a large issue is that the Red Sox don't appear to be excellent evaluators of pitching talent when it comes to the bull pen. Given the money the Sox spend compared to other teams, do you not acknowledge that better performing pitchers could not be purchased, or at the very least better identified? Do you reject or support that recently, the Sox have been outspending on offense knowing that pitching has been an issue (especially health) more recently? I was unwise to challenge captain insano on this point when he identified it a long time ago (and have subsequently corrected myself and apologized to him).

Lackey's a monumental bust which has warped our structure. Bucholz numbers go up in the future which is fine (apart from the injuries he has GUN written all over him). I'm happy with Beckett, Lester & Bucholz assuming injury status as our three guns. The rest, fill in at your leisure....

Of course they could better purchase or identify pitchers they target. That's part of the point I've alluding to in saying it isn't as simple as "spend more."

do I think they're worse than most other teams, though? No. It's hard to evaluate pitching.

insano and I talked about Shields as a possibility down the road -- but he was horrible last year and mediocre the year before. Was this year predictable as a great season?

Jered Weaver has been steadily getting better and is havin a very good year. Scott Kazmir for a while looked to be part of one of the worst trades ever; now he migt be out of baseball. jake Peavy's done nothing since the ChiSox got him. Johan Santana has been a disappointment for the Mets, though still pitching well when healthy (an issue, obviously). Yanks got AJ Burnett and Sabathia in the same offseason -- Sabathia has been very good, Burnett a bust.

Do I think they've been overspending on non-pitchers relative to pitchers? Not really. I'm glad they traded for and signed Gonzalez. I'm glad they signed Crawford. If Crawford came at the expense of Cliff Lee, I'd ABSOLUTELY be unhappy with the decision -- and not just because of the years each has had. But from what I've read Lee wasn't coming to Boston or NY.

...Feel free to make assertions about my personality type. ...

I will, when others (you) do the same.

...I'm not the lazy poster charging other people to do his work for him then having a sook about it. ...

Actually, thats's precisely what you are.

...Feel free to challenge my opinions as that's what threads and forums are for, but go about it with some effort.

Your hypocrisy is funny.