JoeC

Fitting that Andrus was charged with an error, and the next 2 outs were by Remillard (air and ground) to close it out.

Wait - we won?

Lol.

Perfect time for an ill-timed meltdown in a couple of outings in a save situation.

That sounds like it's pretty congruent with what my understanding of how it's SUPPOSED to go is.

I hope it's a matter of Colas working on something specific that may not jump out in the stats. My guess, though, is that they really don't have a plan beyond "we think Colas will be better long term, so we want to keep his service time down"

fixed your post....

Meant "winning" as an average fan would expect... standings.

Or that he is perfectly alert and “with it” and just doesn’t care about winning.

Nuke lives.

Is it just me, or is Eloy being more selective at the plate recently?

They still played .606 ball after April. The second place Blue Jays were .549, and the AL West winners were .519. They had a hot April, but still played championship-caliber baseball the rest of the season.

I think the Sox were scheduled to play them. They played the Indians on 9/10 in Cleveland and played the Yankees on 9/18 (likely rescheduled from 9/11)

You can't win a championship in April, but you sure can lose one in April....

No one is taking this one set up on a tee for you all??

Cancel today's game so we don't have to see Lynn. See if things somehow improve tomorrow.

No worries and no need to apologize. Again, it's been one of the more thought-provoking discussions I've had in awhile.

Definitely has been a really good conversation, and I appreciate your challenging my thoughts.

I agree with everything you say as well, especially the bolded two paragraphs. That's essentially a way more simple and elegant way of expressing what i was trying to describe with roving instructors, etc. As for your question on alignment between the Ryan and Maddux examples, the alignment happens between the coaches at the different levels. Your third paragraph is exactly spot on to my thinking, only the specific items that each player would have the opportunity to maximize / develop at each level would likely change based on competition, coaching, physical maturity, etc., and that's where the serious thinking has to happen within the org. Again, my key point is in alignment and buy-in at the org / coaching level. Having a "type" of pitcher that your organization specializes in helps to simplify the coaches' jobs, but at the end of the day, it's up to the farm system to maximize any assets.

and get a HBP-induced injury to boot.

Again, it just comes down to the organization having a clear alignment on each player's path toward maximizing their potential, which means alignment and buy-in by each coach at each affiliate on a) what to develop to maximize; b) how to get the most out of the player. Right now, the Sox seem to have zero of that, and Fulmer's quotes, while it can be taken as comments from a bitter "failed" prospect, seem to agree with my abovementioned hypothesis.

I don't know enough on the specifics of coaching baseball (I'm a hockey guy when it comes to coaching). That said, I would assume that there are certain fundamentals that are common to all pitchers (like the mental game). If I had to guess though - I'd say: 1. All else being equal, you'd draft one type of pitcher. Unless a guy is a true can't-miss prospect, you favor the guy you know your pipeline can maximize. --or-- 2. Your strategy is, especially in the lower minors where you can have somewhat-overlapping teams, you'd steer your "power" guys more toward one affiliate and your "control" guys more toward another affiliate. At the higher levels, you'd just work on reinforcing the message or having pitching coaches cede overall responsibilities to organizational coaches (roving pitching coaches) who are more specialized in dealing with certain guys. When it comes to player development (again, this is based on my experience in hockey, so baseball may be wildly different), there's a good amount of alignment and communication between various levels, which CAN include "ok - I don't know how to develop this kid. What are the 3 things I should look out for, and can you lay down that groundwork for me to work with him?" I've done this at the youth levels, and I know it's done at the professional levels (NHL / AHL / ECHL) Again, just my amateur opinion and idealistic oversimplification....

Depending on your perspective (perspectives on this board vary wildly), that may be seen as good or bad.

Yeah - at the end of the day, the off-the-field care (like billet families) is really nice, but if you don't have a good plan for direct baseball activities.... you end up with players who are well-adjusted who suck.