Well let's go back to the beginning of the debate. John said, "I'd take this year's team just as it is and it will win 99-100 games next year if it stays pretty healthy"
Then when I pushed back on the "Team as it is" I got, "Well if we change the catching, the stopper, some of the bench players, and maybe a starter or two." So that's not the same team. In a case as gross as this, you can ignore the 7% that defense plays in season-long baseball. On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 9:21 AM, William Marino <[email protected]>wrote: > I think the debate is a little silly. Injuries AND awful pitching > contributed to the lack of performance. You guys are counting hairs on a > gnat’s ass to try to ascribe the effects of each. That’s really hard, to > impossible. If I were counting, though, it put it about 60 hairs on the > poor-pitching gnat’s ass, and 40 on the injuries gnat’s ass. > > > > But Ray, the one real problem with your thinking, as Steve points out, is > your analysis ignores defense. Can’t do that. > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: > [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Beaudoin, John > *Sent:* Monday, October 04, 2010 9:07 AM > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: "From the depths of Hell I stab at thee!" > > > > Yeah. > What he said. > So there. > Good job Steve. > > John > > > ------------------------------ > > *From*: [email protected] <[email protected]> > *To*: [email protected] <[email protected]> > *Sent*: Mon Oct 04 06:01:57 2010 > *Subject*: Re: "From the depths of Hell I stab at thee!" > > I am so tired of baseball ... > > Since defense is hard to judge, you've decided to ignore it completely. The > difference defensively from Pedroia and Youkilis to their replacements is > enormous, as is the difference between an Ellsbury/Cameron outfield and the > detritus we ran out there this year. That alone would shave a number of runs > off the allowed column. > > The starting pitching does not need any kind of overhaul, unless you expect > that Josh Beckett will again miss a third of the season (another > inconsequential injury) and once more put up a 5.78 ERA -- which we have no > reason to expect -- and that John Lackey will continue to be terrible, which > again, we have no reason to expect. > > Last year the Sox scored 872 runs, allowed 736 (just eight fewer than this > horrendous year), won 95 games and the wild card (and exactly matched their > pythag record). > > Say that better defense could have cut 15 runs off the allowed total this > year-- a very small number, if you've ever watched Billy Hall play the OF -- > then how many more runs do the Sox have to score to get to 95 wins from 89? > > If healthy, could the Sox have matched 2009's 872 runs? They got better > production this year at SS (Scutaro over Nick Green/Lugo/Agon), a nearly > full season of Victor Martinez over Varitek, Adrian Beltre matched Jason > Bay's production, Big Papi boosted his OPS by 100 points. Why couldn't they? > Oh yeah, they were missing the first three guys in their lineup for most of > the year. > > Put another way -- do you think Dustin Pedroia is worth two wins more than > Billy Hall over a half season? Is Kevin Youkilis worth a win a month over > Lars Anderson/crippled Mike Lowell? Is Jacoby Ellsbury worth just two wins > over Daniel Nava/Darnell McDonald/Hall/Kalish/Hermida/Van Every/Reddick over > the course of a full year? Just two? > > That's six wins right there -- ignoring all the other injuries, and at bats > given to Gustavo Molina and Kevin Cash -- which would bring them to 95 ... > tied with the Yankees, one behind the Rays. And I'm figuring at least one of > those six wins would be against one of those teams ... > > It's just ludicrous to say that injuries didn't matter. If they just > revamped the bullpen and resigned Martinez and Beltre, I'd take that team. > > Steve O > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Steve, > > > > You're overestimating the impact of these players. While the press likes > to play up the monumental losses associated with these injuries, that's more > hype than reality. The Sox had excellent replacement players, and > demonstrated outstanding organizational depth at most player positions. > Otherwise they would not have scored the 2nd most runs in the league. > > > > The pitching was so bad that the Sox would have had to scored 80 more runs > to make the playoffs. That's not possible based simply on injuries. > > > > Ray > > > > PS. Here's the calc behind the 898. It's based on the Bill James > Pythagorean system. > > > > Projected Winning Percentage = (Runs Scored)^2/ (Runs Scored^2 + Runs > allowed ^2) (^2 = squared) > > > > Let's say the Sox, with no injuries, scored the most runs in baseball. > That would be 860 (Yanks had 859). > > > > With the runs we scored and gave up 818/744 the pythagorean system says we > should have had 88 wins. And we did. > > > > With the most runs in the league 860/744 the pythagorean system says we > would have had 93 wins. Still not enough for the playoffs. > > > > The Red Sox would have had to score 898 runs to get to 96 wins based on > their pitching. So you're saying that the injuries made a difference of 80 > runs over the course of the season. > > > > That's a fantasy. > > > > The pitching on this team was so bad that no amount of health on the part > of our starting players would have made up for it. The Sox gave up 744 > runs. The Yankees gave up 693 runs, and the Rays gave up 649 runs--almost > 100 fewer runs. > > > > Ray > > > > On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Steve Ouellette <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Yes, the bullpen needs to be fixed. The pitching was a huge disappointment > -- particularly Beckett and Lackey. But to say that the losses of Pedroia, > Youkilis, Ellsbury, Cameron, et al. had a "marginal" effect on the team is > ridiculous and illogical. > > Sure, the offense was productive -- does that mean that scoring more runs > would NOT have led to more victories? Run differential leads to victories, > doesn't matter which side it comes on. And don't forget that the players > missing were also some of our best defensive players -- the drop from > Pedroia, Youkilis and Ellsbury to Hall, Lowell and Nava is huge. I don't > know what the defensive numbers say, but I'm guessing the Sox defense once > again will measure as sub par. > > For sanity, we have to replace Papelbon, and bring in more bullpen arms. > Beltre and Victor have to be resigned or replaced. But the team doesn't need > a massive overhaul. > > Steve O > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:28 PM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > > This team, if we kept them next year, would struggle to reach the 91 > games I predicted for them this year. > > > > The injuries actually had a marginal effect on this team. We mostly lost > hitters and still came in 2nd in runs scored. > > > > The problem was pitching, and these problems were not due to injuries. If > we go into next year with this rotation and bullpen we might, indeed, reach > my prediction of 91 games. > > > > Here's what we'd have if we kept this year's "dream team". > > > > 1. Varitek -- 1 year older > > 2. Ortiz -- 1 year older > > 3. Lowell -- 1 year older > > 4. Wakefield -- 1 year older > > > > Then for a rotation we'd have (League average ERA was 4.14) > > > > Beckett -- 5.78 ERA > > Dice-K -- 4.69 ERA > > Lackey -- 4.40 ERA > > > > Closer Papelbon -- 3.90 ERA > > > > > > This is a 100-win team? What does this team have in common with any > 100-win teams in the past? > > > > Nothing, that's what. > > > > As my friend said at the game today, "It's time to pull the bandaid off all > at once." > > > > This team needs a major house cleaning. > > > > > > > > > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 7:34 PM, Beaudoin, John <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I want the same team next year. > If marginally healthy, then they'll win 99 games. If average healthy then > they'll win 102 games or more. > > John > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Sun Oct 03 16:14:25 2010 > Subject: Re: "From the depths of Hell I stab at thee!" > > I wanted to take a swing at Swisher when he dove somewhat into the > stands trying to catch the HR however instead watched him lay on the > ground in pain while the guys 3 rows back fought over the ball. > > Great game - I'm not a Lackey fan however if he can pitch like he did > today for the most part next year, we have a solid 1,2, and 3 starting > pitcher punch already in place. > > -larry > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 6:35 PM, Dan DiBiase <[email protected]> wrote: > > But did you get Lowrie's??!! > > > > Dan D > > Central NJ USA > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Larry Rupp <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Sun, October 3, 2010 12:12:50 PM > > Subject: Re: "From the depths of Hell I stab at thee!" > > > > See you there Ray - I'll be manning the Pesky pole area for an Ortiz > > homerun! > > > > On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 11:20 AM, Ray Salemi <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm off to Fenway to see if the Sox can put a final hurt on the Yankees. > >> It turned out to be a big game after all. > >> > >> -- > >> 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. > > > > -- > 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 "FPGA Simulation: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide" > www.fpgasimulation.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 "FPGA Simulation: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide" > www.fpgasimulation.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. > > -- > 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 "FPGA Simulation: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide" www.fpgasimulation.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.
