An Awful Lot Went Right for the Red Sox This Year

[Frobby]

The Red Sox have won 93, 95, 98, 95, 86 and 96 games over the past 6 regular seasons.

It's like they are very fortunate almost every year. Yeah, that must be it.

I was talking about THIS year. I really don't care about how they did some other season.

[hoosiers]

You guys crack me up. You're right. The Red Sox won this year only because they had the "depth" to back up their myriad of injuries. They were really counting on Matt Clement despite the fact that he was out way before the year even started AND they already had 6 starters lined up IN FRONT OF HIM.

Drew didn't play particularly great this year, but the people who are saying he would have "crippled" us are reading too many commentaries and not looking at enough stats. He had an 800 OPS. He wasn't great. He wasn't terrible.

(I'm really not sure what the difference is between the lack of respect that you criticize with the "eyesrolling" and your repeated "you guys crack me up" type comments ..... but I'm sure you'll split hairs and let us know)

Have you given any thought at to WHY the BoSox had six pitchers lined up in front of Clement? In this respect, depth is only another term for huge payroll, IMO. Look at how much most teams invest in a fourth/fifth starter and how much the BoSox have for their seventh starter. It's payroll. Payroll is the reason the BoSox were able to acquire Beckett. It's the reason they could buy Dice-K.

Further, I'm not sure how one defends Drew's year relative the $ he received. It is certainly NOT a contract the Os would win with given the actual production and the $ involved. I think that goes for a lot of teams.

[RShack]

Have you given any thought at to WHY the BoSox had six pitchers lined up in front of Clement? In this respect, depth is only another term for huge payroll, IMO. Look at how much most teams invest in a fourth/fifth starter and how much the BoSox have for their seventh starter. It's payroll. Payroll is the reason the BoSox were able to acquire Beckett. It's the reason they could buy Dice-K.

Further, I'm not sure how one defends Drew's year relative the $ he received. It is certainly NOT a contract the Os would win with given the actual production and the $ involved. I think that goes for a lot of teams.

Um, what do these issues (payroll and whether or not Drew is worth a hoot) have to do with the topic? The topic was injuries and how they affected things this year...

[hoosiers]

Um, what do these issues (payroll and whether or not Drew is worth a hoot) have to do with the topic? The topic was injuries and how they affected things this year...

I thought the topic was a proposed thought that the BoSox success was due to their health. I proposed that it was due to their payroll.

I'll stay away if you can not connect the dots and believe I'm devaluing the thread.

[RShack]

I thought the topic was a proposed thought that the BoSox success was due to their health. I proposed that it was due to their payroll.

I'll stay away if you can not connect the dots and believe I'm devaluing the thread.

I didn't say anybody should stay away from the thread. I just didn't (and still don't) think that Drew's contract and the BOS payroll have much of anything to do with the thread's topic, that's all...

[square634]

I didn't say anybody should stay away from the thread. I just didn't (and still don't) think that Drew's contract and the BOS payroll have much of anything to do with the thread's topic, that's all...

I thought the thread's topic was that "an awful lot went right for the Sox this year" which I implied to mean both injuries and production :shrug:

[mweb]

I'm just perusing the Red Sox team stats, and marvelling at how much went right for them.

Of their 9 regulars, all 9 played in 130+ games. As best as I can tell, Wily Mo Pena and Doug Mirabelli were the only two Red Sox hitters to go on the DL all year. Manny Ramirez missed some time late in the year, but never went on the DL.

Among the starting pitchers, the Opening Day rotation made 140 starts. Only Schilling missed significant time due to injury. Tavarez eventually was pulled from the rotation.

In the bullpen, only Brendan Donnelly and Joel Piniero suffered injuries.

All in all, the Red Sox have a great team, but they also have been very fortunate in 2007.

Lester missed much of the year as well.

Ortiz has also been battling injuries most of the year.

Sure, they've been a little fortunate concerning injuries, but I don't think they were a lucky team, their just a damn good team.

[square634]

Wow, what is with all the attitude? He wasn't insulting you. He was genuinely asking why your points were germane to the orginal topic. You've responded that you thought the point of the thread was that Boston's success was "due to their health". You didn't concur and so you posted that it was due to their payroll. I disagree that Frobby made any sort of statement that attributed their success TOTALLY or even PRIMARILY to their health. I thought he was pointing out that it was a significant factor.

If you disagree that this was his main point and/or that health was a significant factor and you want to debate the topic, lets debate the topic. But why don't we steer clear of this sniping? I apologize again for my contribution earlier in the thread.

Will you please respond to my post?

Square?

The Sox were certainly better off than we were in terms of injuries, but I also think it is a legitimate point that sometimes teams make their own luck by having great depth and adequate replacements when a plater underperforms or goes down due to injury.

[square634]

OK, then how do you justify them finishing 3rd last year when they were hit by injuries pretty hard? Are they that much deeper this year than last year in your opinion? I agree that depth helps, but I think it is completely intellectually dishonest to make it seem that they would have won the AL East if they were hit with injuries as hard as the Orioles (or as they were last year). You need both: talent and health

Bucholz, Lester, Jacoby Ellsbury and Pedroia were not ready last year as compared to this year. That's four pretty big additions right there. They also added a #2/3 starter (Matsuzaka), an extremely effective setup man (Okajima), and an upgrade in the OF with JD Drew. They also added Lugo at SS and Gagne at RP, which did not work out. So I would say they were a much improved team in terms of depth with 7 key additions, 4 of which were internal.

[mweb]

Ortiz missed only a couple games this year and posted a 1000+ OPS so I have a tough time believing this negatively affected the team's results. What do you believe his OPS would have been if he hadn't been battling injuries?

Lester did miss the first couple months of the season. During that time, the Red Sox had by far the best record in the major leagues without him. Lester was healthy by the All Star break yet didn't even pitch in the play-offs for them. I don't believe he will be more than a 3rd or 4th option out of the pen in the next series. Do you really believe that his injury impacted the Sox nearly as much as any of 8 or so different injuries impacted the Orioles?

I think that saying they were "a little fortunate" concerning injuries isn't being very honest. They're a damn good team that was very fortunate regarding injuries. Last year, they were a damn good team that was hit hard by injuries. Do you disagree?

Did I say anything about the O's? No. So why are you implying that I think their injuries compare to the O's?

Ortiz was hindered by injuries, that is well known, I have no idea how he would have done without them. Lester was replaced by Tavarez, who isn't good, so that did hurt them, not sure why the rest of the team doing so well takes away from that.

The Sox were quite fortunate with their position players in terms of injuries, not so much in terms of performance, I don't think they were that fortunate with pitching if guys who were injured going into the season count.

[Sports Guy]

OK, then how do you justify them finishing 3rd last year when they were hit by injuries pretty hard? Are they that much deeper this year than last year in your opinion? I agree that depth helps, but I think it is completely intellectually dishonest to make it seem that they would have won the AL East if they were hit with injuries as hard as the Orioles (or as they were last year). You need both: talent and health

They are deeper this year...Guys like Buchholz, Dice K, Delcarmen, Ellsbury and Pedroia weren't there last year.

Beckett is much better than last year and is now pitching like the guy you think he is.

Last year, the Red Sox were the best team in the league until August and then got hit with a rash of injuries to their starting position players.

[Sports Guy]

OK, so do you agree with me? They would have won the division or wild card last year if they hadn't been hit with the injuries?

Yes i agree with that.

[mweb]

I didn't say you did. I asked a question. I wasn't meaning to imply that you thought that. I thought the question mark would make that clear. What is your thought on that question?

The use of the word really causes the possible implication.

The O's were struck harder by injures than the Sox, no doubt, but it's not like the O's would have been good if they were fortunate with injuries.

[mweb]

I agree Ortiz was hampered this year. I'm just saying it is tough to imagine Ortiz performing much better even if he was healthy.

I also agree that the Tavarez/Lester swap before the All Star break probably cost them a game or so, maybe two.

Who was injured going into the season that wasn't a known injury prior to ST OTHER than Donnelly?

Lester and Clement.

[mweb]

If the O's had Bedard, DC, Loewen, Benson, and Wright as their starters for the entire season, they are probably about a .500 team imo.