I'm just saying, after playing a lot of Stratomatic, that defense can be mostly ignored so I'm not super excited about a great defensive team.
Unless we're in the playoffs. Then I think the hitting and pitching will be so close that the defense will make the difference. On 1/6/10, Steve Ouellette <[email protected]> wrote: > I didn't say it was all defense, but you're trying to completely ignore it. > The defensive numbers went from worst to second best (minus 79 to plus 54) > and -- with very little change in the pitching -- they suddenly surrendered > fewer runs. Sure, the pitching got a little better, but you don't want to > attribute any of those 273 fewer runs allowed to the defense? Everyone on > the staff started mysteriously pitching better when Brendan Harris wasn't > throwing balls into the first base dugout? I don't know what you're trying > to say about their defense not doing the job because the Sox had a better > run differential -- unless the sarcasm is slipping right past me? Defense, > to the best of my knowledge can only affect the runs allowed, not the runs > scored, so it's only responsible for part of the run differential. > > I thought you'd be with me on this ... I feel so alone. > > Steve O > > On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 7:31 PM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, if you're looking at Run Differential then Tampa came in behind the >> Sox that year. The Sox had a better expected win number of 95 (which they >> hit.) The Rays had an expected win number of 91 (but won 97). So if we're >> looking at Run Differential, the Rays defense didn't do the job. >> >> Tampa's ERA was 3.82 that year. You're telling that their pitchers didn't >> learn a thing or two? >> >> There's no way defense made the difference. >> >> This ain't football. Defense is for highlight reels and playoff games. >> Pitching and Hitting are for getting in the playoffs. >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Steve Ouellette >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> OK then, let's go all the way back to 2008, when the Rays were second in >>> defense and the Phillies were third. >>> >>> In fact, the Rays are the perfect example for this argument. In 2007, >>> they >>> were dead last in all baseball defensively. They scored 782 runs but >>> allowed >>> 944 and finished with 66 wins. >>> >>> In 2008, they improved their defense tremendously at 2b, SS, 3B and RF. >>> The pitching rotation was essentially the same -- except for Matt Garza, >>> who >>> went 11-9 as a rookie -- and the offense scored FEWER runs (774), but the >>> Rays allowed just 671. They won 31 more games and, if I remember >>> correctly, >>> reached the World Series. >>> >>> The Red Sox weren't as terrible as that defensively and don't have as >>> much >>> room for improvement, so no, I don't think they can shed 273 runs >>> allowed. >>> But 50 to 75? I can see that without a problem, and I honestly don't see >>> them losing that much offensively. Which means an even better run >>> differential and 95 or more wins again. Won't necessarily mean they beat >>> the >>> Yankees in the regular season, but they're in the mix. >>> >>> Steve O >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 5:12 PM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Yes, I am saying that the best defensive teams didn't win last year, so >>>> defense doesn't matter -- much. It matters a little, but it doesn't >>>> matter >>>> enough to delude ourselves into thinking that a strong defense makes a >>>> team >>>> great. >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Steve Ouellette <[email protected] >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> And I don't know what Ray is trying to say. The best defensive teams >>>>> didn't win last year, so defense doesn't matter? >>>>> >>>>> I don't think anyone expected that ragtag collection the Mariners threw >>>>> out there to win 85 games last year and have the best ERA in the >>>>> American >>>>> League. That defense (and that park) made Jarrod Washburn a star, and >>>>> he >>>>> flat out sucks. Nobody predicted San Francisco, the top defensive team >>>>> in >>>>> the NL, to win 88 games either. Some experts thought they'd be the >>>>> worst >>>>> team in the league. >>>>> >>>>> The difference between those teams and the Sox is that Boston also has >>>>> a >>>>> very competitive offense. I'm looking forward to 2010. >>>>> >>>>> Steve O >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Tom Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I agree with the first part, and I'm fine with that. I trust Theo's >>>>>> measure of value. He's right a lot more than he's wrong, with the most >>>>>> glaring example of the latter being Texiera, but the Yanks probably >>>>>> would >>>>>> have just bid $1 more. >>>>>> >>>>>> And I'm on board with his signing Lackey. Love the deal. And Beltre is >>>>>> a good deal as well for the Sox as well. Gives us great flexibility. >>>>>> >>>>>> But I'm just not buying the notion that we've disovered the secretthat >>>>>> defense is the THE key to winning, and that's why we're adding capable >>>>>> fielders. We signed the capable fielders because they're willing to >>>>>> play for >>>>>> short money. >>>>>> . >>>>>> . >>>>>> >>>>>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 12:56 PM, Steve Ouellette < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Really? It seems obvious to me that -- unable or unwilling to pony up >>>>>>> for Holliday or Bay -- the Sox decided to focus on defense and >>>>>>> pitching. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Steve O >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But I'm not going to lean too heavily on the defense argument. It >>>>>>>> just strikes me more as a justification for deals that have happened >>>>>>>> than an >>>>>>>> explanation of why the Sox made the deals in the first place. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >>>>>>> . >>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >>>>>> . >>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group. >>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >>>>> . >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Author of "Leading After a Layoff: Reignite Your Team's Productivity in >>>> Just 12 Weeks" >>>> www.leadingafteralayoff.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups >>>> "Red Sox Citizens" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >>>> . >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "Red Sox Citizens" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >>> . >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Author of "Leading After a Layoff: Reignite Your Team's Productivity in >> Just 12 Weeks" >> www.leadingafteralayoff.com >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Red Sox Citizens" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<redsoxcitizens%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en. >> >> > -- Sent from my mobile device Author of "Leading After a Layoff: Reignite Your Team's Productivity in Just 12 Weeks" www.leadingafteralayoff.com
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Red Sox Citizens" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/redsoxcitizens?hl=en.
