Red Mosquito

So how does this line up shake out?

As for previous post: I'd like to see Arrieta signed.

Betts 9
Benintendi 7
Martinez DH
Devers 5
Bogaerts 6
Ramirez/Moreland 3
Bradley 8
Nunez 4
Catcher 2

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.

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.

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

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.

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).

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).

Devers is gonna rake too.

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.

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.

Why is this so hard for people to grasp?

Also, you could have at least liked my tweet.

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.

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....

He's also a member of the Red Sox no?

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.

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.

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.

However: none of those are plural nouns, so there's no drive to singularize them like people do with the Sox teams.

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....

No. No.

What if he deliberately only wears one stocking?

then he's a fool

elliseamos wrote:What if he deliberately only wears one stocking?

That's a red sock. Not a Red Sock.