Tue February 20, 2018 12:02 am
Tue February 20, 2018 12:23 am
Tue February 20, 2018 1:13 am
cutuphalfdead wrote:Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2
Tue February 20, 2018 1:33 am
elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2
That's a lot of faith in Devers, no? I guess you expect the left/right set-up. My thinking was sort of right-heavy, but would put Nunez at the 2 and Benintendi behind JD.
Tue February 20, 2018 2:25 am
cutuphalfdead wrote:elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2
That's a lot of faith in Devers, no? I guess you expect the left/right set-up. My thinking was sort of right-heavy, but would put Nunez at the 2 and Benintendi behind JD.
Nunez has no business in the 2 spot.
Tue February 20, 2018 2:26 am
elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2
That's a lot of faith in Devers, no? I guess you expect the left/right set-up. My thinking was sort of right-heavy, but would put Nunez at the 2 and Benintendi behind JD.
Nunez has no business in the 2 spot.
It was his most frequent and arguably most productive spot last year:
https://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.as ... eason=2017
Tue February 20, 2018 2:37 am
cutuphalfdead wrote:elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2
That's a lot of faith in Devers, no? I guess you expect the left/right set-up. My thinking was sort of right-heavy, but would put Nunez at the 2 and Benintendi behind JD.
Nunez has no business in the 2 spot.
It was his most frequent and arguably most productive spot last year:
https://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.as ... eason=2017
Yeah people do well in the 2 spot because they have protection. I'd rather let Beni get the extra at bats by being early in the order.
Tue February 20, 2018 3:05 am
elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:elliseamos wrote:cutuphalfdead wrote:Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2
That's a lot of faith in Devers, no? I guess you expect the left/right set-up. My thinking was sort of right-heavy, but would put Nunez at the 2 and Benintendi behind JD.
Nunez has no business in the 2 spot.
It was his most frequent and arguably most productive spot last year:
https://www.fangraphs.com/statsplits.as ... eason=2017
Yeah people do well in the 2 spot because they have protection. I'd rather let Beni get the extra at bats by being early in the order.
Understandable, but I figure Beni Biceps could be our best protection for JD. It's a good problem to have (now).
Tue February 20, 2018 4:43 am
Tue February 20, 2018 4:43 am
Simple Torture wrote:Since this has become a thing on Twitter tonight, let's be clear: "Red Sox" is always plural (always!), and should never be made into a singular noun. It is always pronounced "Socks" and never as "Sock." A sentence can always be re-worded to use it correctly. This is the hill I choose to die on.
Wrong: "JD Martinez is officially a Red Sox."
Correct: "JD Martinez is officially a member of the Red Sox"
Wrong: "He's the first Red Sox ever to..."
Correct: "He's the first Red Sox player ever to..."
And so on.
Tue February 20, 2018 4:46 am
Tue February 20, 2018 4:49 am
Tue February 20, 2018 2:48 pm
Simple Torture wrote:Since this has become a thing on Twitter tonight, let's be clear: "Red Sox" is always plural (always!), and should never be made into a singular noun. It is always pronounced "Socks" and never as "Sock." A sentence can always be re-worded to use it correctly. This is the hill I choose to die on.
Wrong: "JD Martinez is officially a Red Sox."
Correct: "JD Martinez is officially a member of the Red Sox"
Wrong: "He's the first Red Sox ever to..."
Correct: "He's the first Red Sox player ever to..."
And so on.
Tue February 20, 2018 3:03 pm
Simple Torture wrote:I mean, I know where it comes from. There are 28 MLB clubs that don't have this issue. Quickly scanning the major sports, I think only the Minnesota Wild have a similar naming convention.
Tue February 20, 2018 3:16 pm
Biff Pocoroba wrote:Simple Torture wrote:I mean, I know where it comes from. There are 28 MLB clubs that don't have this issue. Quickly scanning the major sports, I think only the Minnesota Wild have a similar naming convention.
There are others. Magic, Heat, Thunder, Jazz, Lightning, and Avalanche to name some.
Tue February 20, 2018 3:47 pm
Simple Torture wrote:Biff Pocoroba wrote:Simple Torture wrote:I mean, I know where it comes from. There are 28 MLB clubs that don't have this issue. Quickly scanning the major sports, I think only the Minnesota Wild have a similar naming convention.
There are others. Magic, Heat, Thunder, Jazz, Lightning, and Avalanche to name some.
Yeah I obviously didn't think very hard.
Tue February 20, 2018 4:13 pm
Electromatic wrote:Simple Torture wrote:Since this has become a thing on Twitter tonight, let's be clear: "Red Sox" is always plural (always!), and should never be made into a singular noun. It is always pronounced "Socks" and never as "Sock." A sentence can always be re-worded to use it correctly. This is the hill I choose to die on.
Wrong: "JD Martinez is officially a Red Sox."
Correct: "JD Martinez is officially a member of the Red Sox"
Wrong: "He's the first Red Sox ever to..."
Correct: "He's the first Red Sox player ever to..."
And so on.
Wait, so JD Martinez can't be a Red Sock?
He's the first Red Sock to....
Tue February 20, 2018 4:34 pm
Tue February 20, 2018 4:35 pm
Tue February 20, 2018 4:45 pm
elliseamos wrote:What if he deliberately only wears one stocking?