the much-maligned 1978 Red Sox

by RickD on Sep 26, 2011 10:46 PM EDT

While we watch the 2011 Red Sox have the worst September in living history, it's worth a moment to pause and reflect on the team that was the 1978. I'll let wikipedia summarize what happened:

In 1978, the Red Sox and the Yankees were involved in a tight pennant race. The Yankees were 14 1⁄2 games behind the Red Sox in July, and on September 10, after completing a 4-game sweep of the Red Sox (known as "The Boston Massacre"), the Yankees tied for the divisional lead.

But that wasn't the end of the story. More after the jump.

Do you like this story?

Comments

The Red Sox

win 12 of their last 14, and their last 7 IIRC.

’78 was worse, though for one simple reason: we had not come back down 3 to 0 in the ALCS and gone on to win the World Series then.

There is no comparison to the pain of losing before 2004. Every Sox fan of my generation knew the stories: ‘46 (deciding run scores from first on a single), ’67, ’75, ’77. We had no memory of every winning, and we weren’t sure that we ever would.

That is not true now.

by flasoxfan on Sep 26, 2011 11:21 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

Very nice point.

But there is no guarantee of ever winning again either.

by Wicklow on Sep 27, 2011 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions

But I was alive

to see the last one – which few could say in ’78

by flasoxfan on Sep 27, 2011 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions

The 2004 Sox almost made us forget about Bill Buckner in 1986.

The 2011 Sox could almost make us forget about Bucky Bleeping Dent in 1978!

by The Bat on Sep 27, 2011 10:48 AM EDT reply actions

Let the poor man be.

Bill Buckner has been entirely forgiven (if not forgotten), at least by my Father and I.

In hindsight, Buckner should have laid down in the path of the ball, blocking it with his entire horizontal frame, but it was more the manager’s fault for leaving in the arthritic old ballplayer who was known as a below-average defender.

Also, just like in ’75, the Sox had a chance to win Game 7, and held an early 3-0 lead in Game 7 both years.

by Wicklow on Sep 27, 2011 2:11 PM EDT reply actions

bullpens matter

The ’86 Mets had a much better bullpen than the ’86 Sox. You cannot count on holding onto an early lead when your bullpen is weak.

by RickD on Sep 27, 2011 2:33 PM EDT up reply actions

The 1978 Sox didn't choke

They won 99 games, tied for the most wins in all of baseball that year (prior to the 1-game playoff). Boston played .567 ball over after August 1st, a 92-win pace. The Sox only lost their lead because the MFY played .712 ball over the same period (that’s a 115-win pace).

KC won the AL West with 92 wins The Philies won the NL East with 90 wins and the 95-win Dodgers toppped the NL West.

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

by Drugs Delaney on Sep 28, 2011 10:31 AM EDT reply actions

The 1978 Sox

Were a dangerous team with a deep lineup. George Scott may have been past his sell by date and Butch Hobson never reminded anyone of Brooks Robinson at 3b, but they were solidup the middle on defense, featured a still dangerous Yaz, a terrific all around RF in Dwight Evans and got a career year from Jim Rice. Plus they had 3 very durable and reliable staring pitchers and Bob Stanley had a really solid year in the bullpen. This was a high quality team.

by Iggy Poptart on Sep 29, 2011 1:17 AM EDT reply actions

They were the greatest team that never won.

But where does this team go from here?

by 75bandwagon on Sep 29, 2011 2:19 AM EDT reply actions

Where do they go

They find a new every day right fielder, settle on a long term solution at short stop, pick up a 4th starter and hope for a return to health of those who got hurt, especially Bucholz and Youkalis. This is not really a major fix that is required.
What is particularly hard is that if the Sox had not traded for Gonzalez, he likely would be a free agent in the off season and the availability of Fielder and possibly Pujols would have kept his asking price down. The three prospects that were given up for Gonzalez have considerable value. Beltre could have been re-signed, the offense would have gotten a lift from a healthy Ellsbury and Pedroia and Beltre would have done his 30 hr 100 rbi thing again. Then, this off season, the needs that had to be filled could be met via signing FA Gonzalez and then dealing either Beltre or Youkalis and the any or all of the three tauted prospects still in house (not dealt for Gonzalez) for whetever pitching or outfield help that was needed.

by Iggy Poptart on Sep 29, 2011 2:03 PM EDT up reply actions

You read my mind

Gonzo’s and Beltre’s stats were nearly identical in 2010. And I’m not a very big fan of having Youk at third base. Resigning Beltre would have sewn up the corners and still kept our offense potent. I know that both of them were hampered by injuries this year, but you can never predict that. It’s not always about the ‘’big name’’ players, but the ’’right’’ players and I always thought that Beltre was a better fit because it would have kept Youk at first base.

by 75bandwagon on Sep 29, 2011 9:27 PM EDT reply actions