04-03-06, Red Sox at Rangers [Swing Score: Sox +1]

Purchase Touch-up Kit Order 36 Beauty Calcium Carbonate For Sale Natural Ventolin Purchase Flonase Generic Viagra Cialis Levitra Diarex Pill Zyvox For Sale Himplasia Without Prescription Buying Viagra Jelly Buy Lioresal Online Generic Neurontin Ayurslim For Sale Generic Acticin Natural Aceon Flonase For Sale Buying Hgh Generic Amoxil Prednisone Pill Natural Norvasc Natural Pamelor Generic Sinequan Cymbalta For Sale Buy Flovent Online Natural Virility Gum Order Zyrtec Buying Exelon Purchase Dostinex Buying Mircette Viagra Pill Purchase Rimonabant Maxaquin Without Prescription Natural Avapro Buying Crestor Generic Melatonin Beconase Aq Without Prescription Order Stretchnil Generic Aldactone Natural Cialis Soft Tabs Generic Sustiva Protonix Without Prescription Lasuna Without Prescription Buying Lopid Generic Zero Nicotine Isoptin Pill Himcolin Price Risperdal Pill Sustiva Without Prescription Generic Celexa Order Cordarone

The Red Sox haven’t won a season opener since 2000, and found plenty to be happy about with a solid first win. One of our aces (Schilling) beat their ace (Millwood) in a game that started out sharp and opened up with a key 2-out, 2-RBI double by Jason Varitek (who had a pretty lousy spring at the plate). David Ortiz hit a vintage, moonshot, 2-run HR off the right field pole. Coco Crisp (what a set of wheels!) scored twice from first base on doubles by Loretta and Ortiz and had a stellar defensive grab in the 9th. Mike Lowell had a solo HR, and Jonathon Papelbon pitched a perfect eighth. Keith Foulke gave up what felt like 2000 ft. worth of laser shots and fly balls; fortunately, most of them were foul balls or fly ball outs, and perhaps even more fortunately, he either knows what he’s got to work on, or the team knows what they’re going to get from him and plans his replacement.

Roger Clemens was invited to the game by Rangers owner Tom Hicks; the Rocket met with some Sox brass and players before the game and sat in the front row to watch two teams competing for his services go at it. He says he only wants to come back for a contender; he only saw one today.

For baseball fans, the season opener is always about momentum, but not every season opener means a heck of a lot. This one had enough going on that I feel it might, and I score it +1.

About this entry

You’re currently reading “04-03-06, Red Sox at Rangers [Swing Score: Sox +1],” an entry on Things Worth Knowing

Published:: 04.03.06 / 10pm

Category:: 2006 Baseball Season

Scott Janssens 04.04.06 / 12pm

I’d score it a 0. This is a game the Red Sox are expected to win and they led the whole game.

Marshall 04.04.06 / 2pm

I went back and forth about it. Every baseball fan is excited on Opening Day and wants to ascribe a world of importance to a first game win, and conversely, to shrug off a loss. You certainly don’t know what your team is for a while, so April (and perhaps even May) “Swing” games should be pretty rare.

That said, while I think the Red Sox should generally be favored against the Rangers, I think Schilling had (and has) a lot to prove, and it was a pretty well-rounded attack for the entire team. Felt like something to me…

…but so goes the debate.

Scott Janssens 04.04.06 / 3pm

You sent me email, and I accidentally deleted it before reading it. Please resend.

If you’re going to map all teams, you’ll need a concensus about where the threshold is, otherwise no valid comparisons can be made. I don’t think the Red Sox game comes close to a +1.

Yesterday (as I see it):

Mariners -1
A’s -1
Mets +1 (borderline, I could be persuaded)
Rockies +1
Astros +1
Braves/Dodgers I’ve no idea how to score that one.

Scott Janssens 04.04.06 / 4pm

Upon further thought I’d give +1 to the Cards and Cubs and a -1 to the Phillies.

Dave Champagne 04.04.06 / 10pm

I feel like some of your picks of + or – 1 are just by virtue of the highly lopsided scores in those games and not necessarily that the game was a true swing game. The Cubs for instance I think is one that should be a 0. They have a good team, had a favorable pitching matchup, and the Reds are not a particularly strong team. They scored a lot of runs yes, but this didn’t go down to the wire, there weren’t a lot of lead changes, and the other team still scored 7; I don’t think that can be called a swing game.

On the other hand, I want to make the case that Detroit should have a +1. They won the first game under their new manager, with a new controversial ace, and it’s divisional.

Trey Peiffer 04.05.06 / 12am

monday was a +1 for the sox: schill “the ace” is back, coco impressive
tueday was a -1 for the sox: wakefield-bard combo doesnt look good

i feel the next week or so will bee breakeven now that the excitement of the beginning of the season is over. unless we pitch a one hitter or sweep the up and coming bluejays.

Scott Janssens 04.05.06 / 10am

Originally I had the Cubs as 0, I’m a Sox Fan (The original White variety) and wondered if there were some bias in play. Sure the Reds suck, but 16 runs is 16 runs even if 6 were unearned. I think it’d be a +1 if it was the Yankees beating the Reds. Teams don’t regularly score in double digits, therefore it’s a swing. At least that was my logic.

I think the trend should be toward 0. I gave the White Sox a 0 for their opener even though they played a contender and scored six runs more than their average last season. The White Sox are supposed to and expect to win against contenders. The Red Sox played a team that’s projected to come in last and had an easy time of it. I’d say game two for both Sox was a 0 as well. Teams will lose games. Most losses, especially on day 2, affect fans much worse than the players. Remember, it’s not the fans emotions that are being measured.

If 100 games are expected to be 0, then one would assume that the average .500 team would have 16 pluses and 16 minues. A plus or minus should be due to a significant event: scoring 16 runs, a come from behind victory (especially a walk off), a no hitter, 20 strikeouts, snapping a losing streak > 3 games, a victory (or loss) the leads to a change in the standings, sweeping a significatly better team.

Actually, I probably handed too many out.

Consider me off this project. It’s an interesting idea, but I see too many biases (including my own) along with a lack of a solid definition of what constitutes a “swing” game preventing the project from working. I suspect the best route would be to assign values by committee to compensate for biases, but setting that up after the season has started is problematic.

Good luck with it.

Gah, my math is wrong, it would be 31 and 31 for the .500 team. But I still feel too many are being handed out.

Things Worth Knowing

04-03-06, Red Sox at Rangers [Swing Score: Sox +1]

About this entry

9 Comments

Have your say

Recently

Categories