This time, Angels might run wild on Red Sox - MLB News - FOX Sports on MSN

Ken Rosenthal thinks the Angels will win this series in five games because the Red Sox don't know how to throw baserunners out. Good point, Kenny, but there's a helluva lot more to the game of baseball than just that, too. And remember -- Tim Wakefield isn't pitching in this series.

5 months ago Randy Booth 18 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I think we will lose the series in 4 games but I hope I am wrong. Not being able to throw out runners will be part of the reason, but our SP and our offense scares me to death.

VARITEK MUST GO
Brandon Webb in 2010

by gizmosandy on Oct 5, 2009 4:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm with you on that.

"It would have been a nice idea if you could run through the postseason without losing. I don't think it's realistic."
--Terry Francona

by BoldandBrash on Oct 5, 2009 8:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Huh?

Rock me, sexy Jesus...

by nuthinboutnuthin on Oct 6, 2009 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

We couldn't throw runners out

last year and it did not hurt so much against the Angels. Lester is good at holding runners on, and Beckett was very effective in his last start against the Angels this year throwing over to 1b multiple times with authority to neutralize SBs. Of course it is important to keep this in check, and could hurt.

One thing-if you look historically, VMart has been decent in throwing runners out. Did his injury last year hurt his effectiveness in this regard?

by Buzzy on Oct 5, 2009 4:23 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Beckett was very effective in his last start against the Angels this year throwing over to 1b multiple times with authority to neutralize SBs.

Plus, if that’s not working, he can just buzz one past Abrieu’s face.

Goddamn that DeMarlo Hale.

by Bloggy on Oct 5, 2009 8:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think that Lester is one of the best in the game at holding runners on.

"It would have been a nice idea if you could run through the postseason without losing. I don't think it's realistic."
--Terry Francona

by BoldandBrash on Oct 5, 2009 9:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Orange County has to get on base to steal bases

Their offense wasn’t good in September: .337 team OBP (.322 wOBA), compared to .362 team OBP for the Sox (.360 wOBA). Also, I’m not sure how many of SB turn into runs.

The Sox didn’t throw anyone out all year and still won 95 games. If the Sox lose this series, it’ll be because they are out-hit and out-pitched; not because of the Angels’ running game.

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 5, 2009 4:34 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1

OverTheMonster.com

by Randy Booth on Oct 5, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

This article is bizarre

Rosenthal says the Angles have an advantage in the running game, an unimportant part of the equation, then goes on to talk about how much better the Sox are in terms of pitching and hitting, even going so far as to point out our better run differential despite playing in a stronger division, and then says the Angels will win in 5. I don’t really understand him sometimes. I’ll take the Sox in 5.

by Gnick on Oct 5, 2009 4:53 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Consistent stream of baserunners >>> Sporadic baserunners who steal 2nd 40% of the time and get thrown out 10% of the time.

by Ben Buchanan on Oct 5, 2009 5:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

So,

According to Tom Tango, the run values of a SB is .19 and a CS is -.46 runs. So, over the course of the Red Sox season they gave up 151 SB’s and caught 16 runners, meaning the team gave up a net of 36 runs on SB’s over the course of 162 games. That is .2 runs per game. Now that is certainly one of the Angels’ advantages in this series, but its hard to believe that will be the difference in the series.

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 5, 2009 6:24 PM EDT reply actions 4 recs

I rec you, sir.

by Ben Buchanan on Oct 5, 2009 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

+1

I gotta go 'cause I'm probably definitely gonna nod out again.

by Drugs Delaney on Oct 5, 2009 6:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Research = Rec.

@bs_uf15bosox9be The Original Gameday; Learn to use SB Nation

by bs.uf15bosox9bears23 on Oct 5, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why overlook or justify this important weakness?

It is easy to identify the cause and may be something that can be treated via practice now and maybe better personnel later. There is no rule that the Sox can’t have catchers that can throw out baserunners, or at least I am not aware of such a rule.

by NG on Oct 5, 2009 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Practice?

Perfect idea! I just wish Varitek, or Victor, or Francona had come up with such a progressive idea and fixed it earlier in the season.

"Ninety percent [of my salary] I'll spend on good times, women, and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent I'll probably waste."
-Tug McGraw

by BTLove on Oct 5, 2009 8:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You posted this twice and both times it was a poorly thought out post.

V-Mart and Tek are not going to throw out a lot of runners. The only way to change it would be through the acquisition of a new catcher, and you may as well say “Well hell, why CAN’T we have Tim Lincecum? There’s no rule!”

by Ben Buchanan on Oct 5, 2009 9:32 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs