July 6, 2009

G82: Athletics 6, Red Sox 0

Athletics - 000 401 001 - 6 15  1
Red Sox - 000 000 000 - 0 2 1
Anderson (9-2-0-2-9, 111) stole the show, dominating the Red Sox with ease.

The only hits off the 21-year-old left-hander were Jason Bay's single to left in the second and Nick Green's single to right in the fifth.

Bay was also the only Boston runner to advance past first base, stealing second after his single and then reaching on a three-base fielding error by center fielder Scott Hairtston in the seventh.

Smoltz (6-10-5-1-3, 99) allowed five hits and four runs in the fourth as Oakland batted around. He had trouble locating his off-speed pitches all night.

Garciaparra received a lengthy standing ovation -- more than two full minutes -- before he led off the second inning. He tipped his helmet and applauded back. Nomar went 2-for-4.

Before the game, Nomar expressed his appreciation for Red Sox fans:
I love them. I don't how else to put it to the fans that I love them, and the way they treated me the whole time I was here. I can't tell them how much that meant to me.
***

Brett Anderson (5.45, 75 ERA+) / John Smoltz (6.00, 77 ERA+)

Smoltz's first start at Fenway Park as a member of the Red Sox will be overshadowed tonight by the return of Nomar Garciaparra, who will play in Boston as an opposing player for the first time.

Aaron Bates has been called up from Pawtucket and will play first base and bat ninth tonight in his major league debut. Bates was a third-round pick for Boston in 2006.

After batting .370 for Portland in May, Bates was promoted to AAA on June 7. Bates is hitting only .182 for the PawSox in 88 at-bats and is 0-for-his-last-27.

Jed Lowrie was moved to the 60-day DL to make room on the 40-man roster.

Fun Fact: Rookie LHP Anderson was less than six months old when Smoltz made his major league debut in 1988.

211 comments:

«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 211 of 211
s1c said...

Not sure if you guys saw but Pedroia was at the hospital with his pregnant wife. I sure hope everything is ok, but WEEI is saying he is questionable for tonight's game (tuesday).

As for Smoltz, only third game back and the 2nd one was interupted by rain and he threw less than or about 50 pitches.

He will be there!

L-girl said...

"Still, were I Theo"

Lucky for us you're not, since first place means very little to you!

s1c said...

The offense come back - since 6/16/2009 - 19 games the sox have scored 88 runs and went 11-8. The offense is not the problem here since that is almost 5 runs a game.

This has been a disapointing homestand because of who the sox are playing.

Since 2003 -

A's are 8 - 17 at Fenway with a 5.24 ERA.

Mariners are - 7 - 12 at Fenway with a 5.24 ERA.

The three losses this week are just that 3 losses. Sure they were frustrating but it is not like the A's and Mariners don't win games at Fenway.

redsock said...

... we don't hit all that well, and really haven't for about three years.

2006: 6th in Runs; 2nd in OBP; 7th in SLG

2007: 3rd in Runs; 2nd in OBP; 3rd in SLG

2008: 2nd in Runs; 1st in OBP; 3rd in SLG

2009: 3rd (T) in Runs; 3rd in OBP; 4th in SLG

I'm not sure how you can look at 2007 and 2008 and say the Red Sox didn't hit/score all that well. (The injury hell of August 2006 contributed to that year's low numbers.)

The 2003-05 Red Sox were some of the best slugging/scoring teams in baseball history. No team can keep that up.

redsock said...

W-L %: Boston is 2nd in MLB.

1 team better (Dodgers)
28 teams worse

Barth said...

I said first place AT THIS POIN doesn't mean much to me. I have some bad news if you think Theo has a different view. He does not.

As the Globe pointed out today, there is nobody in our starting lineup hitting over .300. The statistics comparing our hitting to the rest of both leagues is misleading since generally we hit crappy pitching better than most teams. The problem is when we face good pitching, and if you think we are an offensive powerhouse, you are watching different games than I am.

But I am happy with this team and where we are. I said nothing otherwise. I like this team better than last year's at this point, or the 2007 versio which won a world championship.

Still, we are underachieving and it is somewhat concerning. Pedey, Bay and even Youk are having a rough time right now and blissing out on our 1 game lead gets us nowhere.

There is much that I like about Terry Francona and one of them is his ability to deal with issues without panic and I have great faith that he will get us through this patch, too. But if you think he is happy with a one game lead, you are certainly mistaken.

redsock said...

As the Globe pointed out today, there is nobody in our starting lineup hitting over .300.

I don't much care about hitting .300 -- getting on base means more to me -- but that statement is deceiving.

.299 - Ellsbury
.296 - Youkilis
.290 - Pedroia

The statistics comparing our hitting to the rest of both leagues is misleading since generally we hit crappy pitching better than most teams.

Do you have stats/links/posts that show this? How do all teams do against pitchers with ERAs over 5? And does Boston hit worse than average against "good" pitchers? I'd like to see something on that.

Obviously, Theo would love to have a 25-game lead in the East right now. Who wouldn't?

Is Tito happy with a one-game lead? Compared to being 10 GA, no. Compared to being in the basement, though, I'll bet he's thrilled.

I don't understand the negativity that often comes out when the team drops two in a row or gets shutout by a rookie -- which, by the way, I showed awhile back does not happen all that often, contrary to everyone's perception.

Barth said...

This "negativity" thing always amuses me. It may be an age thing, not in terms of chronological age, but in terms of years of watching baseball. It is not "negativity" to not get too high on a one game lead in July or to worry about the team's progress. The season is, as the players tell us, a grind and when you hit rough patches we recognize them.

This rah, rah, our team is great works for some people, I guess. Maybe you had to be there in 1978 to watch the bottom fall out of a team that was 100 times better than the one which beat them. But then again, we saw what happened in 2006, and, well, 2003 and last year, too so I am not sure where this giddy optimism that nothing can go wrong comes from.

Sure being up one is better than being down one and not as good as being up 25. My point is not that, but that up one is not all that meaningful at all right now.

Do you think we are eight games better than NY? Really? Good for you.

Love our rotation until we get to the five whole. I like our bullpen a lot, but maybe Ramirez is being handed too much work and Pap is just not the Pap he was (and no numbers are going to convince me otherwise).

I like our lineup, but some of the older guys concern me: Papi, Lowell, 'Tek in particular and you have to worry that they may wear down a bit. Unlike other years, I do not see instant fixes out of Pawtucket and Portland, for a sagging offense, though obviously I do see the arms down there.

That's not "negativity." That is a realistic look at where we are right now,a couple of hours before game time. Mazz says we need a spark. Maybe that's it. Maybe all we need is the few days off that the break gives us, though six of our guys will be in SL.

I dunno. But I do know this. Theo sees what I see and much more and he is not sitting around gazing fondly at his team or the standings.

redsock said...

Maybe you had to be there in 1978 ...

I was. I have been following the Red Sox for 34 years.

This rah, rah, our team is great works for some people, I guess.

Strawman.
No one is saying this.

Theo ... is not sitting around gazing fondly at his team or the standings.

Again, you are talking about things that *no one* has said or even implied. Please stop.

My point is ... that up one is not all that meaningful at all right now.

Up by 1 with 79 to play ... you're right.

But again, who here is doing jumping jacks about having a one-game lead?

No one that I can see.

No one is saying the team is perfect. No one is saying we'd turn down more wins.

I agree there is no reason to throw a party for a one-game lead in early July. But for the exact same reason, there is no reason to panic or even express serious worry -- there are 79 more games to go.

...

As I have said before, I no longer live and die by every inning and every game. 2004 changed that in my head. Didn't see it coming, could never have predicted it, but it happened.

I don't stew over losses anymore. I go to bed and look forward to the next game. I saw two WS titles -- now I can simply enjoy watching my team every night without the overlying drama of maybe they will never win a title. It's nice. It's healthy. That means far fewer rants on this blog, but that's how it goes....

Maybe that feeling is unique. I simply don't feel the need to rent my garments after an 11-inning loss anymore.

L-girl said...

"Maybe you had to be there in 1978 to watch the bottom fall out of a team that was 100 times better than the one which beat them."

Most of us did live through that.

But we also lived through 2004 and 2007, which makes some of us wonder why Sox fans are still flogging 1978. Let NYY fans do that.

Like Redsock said, 1 GA isn't as good as 10 GA, but not as bad as 1 GB. The team's not perfect, but it's good.

One person's realism is another person's crushing negativity. One person's realism is another person's pollyanna optimism.

And as I said recently, I've gotten to the point where the thing I hate most about losses is fan's reaction. We hit a rough spot, and out comes 1978. Fuck 1978. I'm living in the present.

Barth said...

Nobody's "flogging" 1978. I do not think that what happened in 1978 is bound to happen again, or any of that nonsense. What 1978 says, to any team, is that when things are looking good, make the most of it, knowing that it will not last forever, try to minimize slumps and spread them around, deal with problems before they become enormous (e.g, let's not repeat the Hobson will be okay meme with Lowell unless, this time, it has some basis) and when things are not going well, don't panic.

That's all I am saying. That was true 1978 but the front office moved too slowly, and it is true in 2009, when, I suspectm the front office will do what has to be done quickly.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 211 of 211   Newer› Newest»