I think it's a little premature though. 3 losses in a row to start the season does suck, but hopefully it's just nervous jitters.
I agree, getting bent out of shape this early is premature. Certainly some concern, though, over your top 3 pitchers getting s ed. At least it was by the defending AL champ which appears to be a good team yet again
For the Giants the early concern is defense. Losing 3 of 4 to LA sucks
My rule is I never panic until June.
ing Crawford needs to pull his head out of his ass and get on base. He's sitting at .188 OBP right now. That's pitiful. And his only hits came yesterday, buried in the 7th slot. Pretty sure the Sox didn't pay Crawford to bat 7th.
Also, I knew Saltalamacchia wasn't Joe Mauer, but a .167 BA/OBP? , Varitek got roasted last year for a poor BA, and he wasn't nearly this bad, plus he seemed to call a game much better.
Josh Tomlin is looking pretty good so far for the Tribe...
Isn't the general rule that you don't get a true and honest gauge of a team in the MLB until the 40 game mark? I mean, unless they start 0-10 or something crazy like that, I'm sure you have to just wait to see how things unfold over the course of the extremely long season. I think that goes for individual hitters as well. First 10 games of the season, you'll see guys with crazy batting averages and OPB and SLG. If you start hot, you can hit .400 and have a 1.500 SLG% in the first week or so of the season. And if you don't start off hot, you can have incredibly poor hitting stats as well. One big hitting game, you look like Babe Ruth. One 0-for-5, you can drop .150 points in BA.
I do think it's a big concern for Boston to see how they're starting pitching starts and holds up. But as far as overall assessment, wayyyy too early.
Never really thought Crawford was worth what he got, but the season barely started and JamStone does have a point that you tend to get an idea of a team after its 2nd month of play. Though, it doesn't always work out that way (See: Giants). They should be fine in the long run.
Oh yeah, but I'm still frustrated. The AL East is obviously a very compe ive division, and I'd rather not lose ground early.
Plus, you never know how a player will react to moving to a new city. 4 out of 5 times, they're the same player, but sometimes they completely change. (My fave example of good to crap would be Gagne... we acquired him and he immediately went to crap>)
0-5, on its way...
Its called off the roids.
He's not. Carl Crawford is a rich man's Juan Pierre. It was a terrible signing. The Red Sox lineup needed more pop, not another Jacoby Ellsbury. Losing Beltre + VMart and replacing them with Adrian Gonzalez and Crawford wasn't much of an upgrade at all.
amSton, bringin' the essay goods, on a Thursday morning nonetheless
bully for you Jammy!
If you want to contend with teams like the Yankees and Rangers in the AL, you need a lineup that's pretty powerful throughout. When you have a lineup with easy outs like Scutaro, Saltalamachia, Nancy Drew/Mike Cameron, you have absolutely no chance to contend. Maybe Theo re ed Epstein will figure that out one day and stop signing guys like Mike Cameron and Scutaro because of their veteran savvy.
Never thought I'd see the Red Sox come with a lineup full of banjo hitters.
Epstein's problem is there isn't anyone to replace what Manny and David Ortiz gave them in the middle of the lineup.
Don't think the Red Sox problem is their line-up. They'll come around. They have good hitters at the top and in the middle of their line-up. Sure they have some easy outs at the bottom. But you have to believe Pedroia, Crawford, Adrian, and Youk are all going to hit. Once those guys start to hit consistently, they'll only need occasional hitting from the bottom of the order. They could probably use one more righty power bat to balance the line-up. But that line-up should be fine once a couple of them get their swings going.
I think they're probably more worried about their overall pitching. You can almost excuse getting hit by the Rangers in Arlington. But getting hit by the Indians is disheartening to say the least. Beckett pitched okay so the bats failed them in that game. But in the other four games, Red Sox pitching is giving up almost 7 runs a game. Ouch. I think they need great, great seasons (not just good or slightly above average, but great) from their three top pitchers, Beckett, Lester, and Buccholz. They're hitting will come around.
Cleveland's offense actually has a chance to be fairly good. It's their starting pitching that's the problem.
No no... I mean, the splits AS SOON AS HE GOT TO BOSTON were amazing. From some 2.5 ERA to 20...
I'm a big fan of Choo and Santana is a stud. Sometimes it just takes two great hitters to make a line-up. sometimes one great hitter can carry an offense like Albert did for several years. I think Choo might be the most underrated player in the AL. Great five tool player. Like an Ichiro-lite but also with some power. It's nice to see him be able to play these next two seasons instead of serve. He needs to start swinging though.
Look at these splits for Gagne:
http://mlb.mlb.com/team/player.jsp?p...pe='R'
Pre All Star: 1.32 ERA
Post All Star: 6.57 ERA
From wikipedia:
I always get concerned (maybe irrationally so) that when a new player struggles, he's going to be our next Gagne.However, Gagné struggled in his new role with the Red Sox. In his first 15 appearances, Gagné allowed 14 earned runs in 14 innings (a 9.00 ERA) with three blown saves and an opponent batting average of over .350.[17]
I thought at first it was the pitchers but the batters aren't doing much of anything.
That got Crawford hasn't done since the start of opening week.
6 straight now..swept by the Indians. lol
I'm not worried yet but what the is going on..
Yeah certainly today was about the hitters not producing runs when you got Lester pitching 7 scoreless. I still think the problems over the long haul will be more about pitching than hitting for the Red Sox.
He got traded halfway through the season you dumbass. he was terrific in Texas, then traded and sucked seriously in Boston. roids had nothing to do with that.
btw Lng, thanks for David Murphy!tbh at the time I was more excited about Gabbard
You're welcome!He got traded halfway through the season you dumbass. he was terrific in Texas, then traded and sucked seriously in Boston. roids had nothing to do with that.
btw Lng, thanks for David Murphy!
Also, (insert minute-long string of curse words here).
Tribe traded Cy Young winners in back-to-back years for basically a handful of magic beans. They got Santana for Casey Blake. Go figure.
The new boston catcher is not working out.
He's ing horrible.
Already down 2-0 to the Yankees. 0-7 here we come.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
