Predicting how many games the Red Sox will lose this year, the Red Sox team most like this one, typical Connor McDavid, Grateful Dead and J.S. Bach type announcers
- 17 hours ago
- 5 min read
Saturday 4/25/26
The last time the Red Sox lost 100 games was in 1965. Rubber Soul had yet to come out. Highway 61 Revisited was released about a month before the season finished. Before that was back in the 1930s (then end of the 1920s and the start of the 1930s was a dark time for the Old Towne Team. They languished in the mire while the Yankees soared in the sky.
These 2026 Red Sox may give those 1965 Red Sox a run for their futile money. 100 losses is a possibility. This isn't a good team and I don't see how they get that much better. You may (or not) be looking at a new manager next year, a new hitting coach (which you should have been looking at already), new pitching coach, new GM, bunch of new players.
I've seen all I need to see of this mix. Are we calling it a nucleus? I mean, what a lackluster, uninspiring core.
You know who these Red Sox remind me of? The 1994 Red Sox. With less pizzazz. And upside. John Valentin became a player. They had Mo Vaughan coming into his own and leading up to that batch of years when he was on a tear.
But you had guys like Otis Nixon, Scott Fletcher, Billy Hatcher, cooked Andre Dawson, Damon Berryhill in your starting line-up. All-Star Scott Cooper. Because someone has to represent the team. How are you going to find an All-Star on this current roster?
Doesn't that sound a lot like the kind of line-up the 2026 Red Sox have?
This could be a lost year for Garrett Crochet. He simply might be a guy you have to baby rather than ride. Then next year his innings are managed even more, and he's effective, but he only gives you 170 innings and goes like 9-6 with a 2.98 ERA. There aren't horses anymore, but I thought he could maybe be a mini-one? Looks less likely now.
The last Red Sox team to lose 90 games was the 2014 squad. 100 may not be in the cards for this year, but I'd be surprised if they don't lose at least 90. I think they'd be lucky to get to .500.
Last night, in dropping yet another game to fall to 9-17, the Sox only struck out 6 times, which is rare for them. They only scored three runs though, and--get this--surrendered 20 hits to Oriole batters.
Damn!
It was another of those nights where Sox pitching--the useless Brayan Bello (whose ERA is now 9.00) in this case, who looks to me like a man going through the motions--allowed 3 or 4 runs in the opponent's first offensive frame, and the game is as good as over--moments after it began!--against this toothless Red Sox line-up. You have all these Sox players whose OPS looks more like Ted Williams' OBP.
Roman Anthony was out of the line-up again last night. So, let me see if I have this straight: guy is in his early twenties, already has nagging injuries, doesn't appear to have much pop, isn't good in the field and looks like a DH.
This is the big superstar for this generation, huh?
Also: Alex Cora is maddening with his obsession with the whole lefty-righty-lefty-righty line-up thing. Gee. Maybe it isn't the answer to everything after all. I don't know, man. Seems like it might not be. Maybe try something else just the once...
The Celtics got a needed win last night--which I felt might have been the difference between winning and losing the series--despite another bad shooting performance from Derrick White. He's kind of lost it in that regard. The Hawks have a good chance to beat the Knicks--the series is going at least six--and I don't think these higher seeds losing would be all that surprising. Just my sense of where the league is at. And the Eastern Conference in particular. The Celtics really had to grind out that victory.
Unfortunately, I think the Bruins are done, but we'll see. They needed that Game 3 at home. Then again, if they win tomorrow afternoon, they'll go back to Buffalo tied 2-2, and that would definitely be the most I'd have hoped for after four. I had said earlier that I preferred the Bruins to start on the road. I pretty much always prefer this for them, and that goes in the years when they've been a theoretical Cup contender.
Why? Also unfortunately, I think the Bruins are a choking organization. The have a long choking history. A long history of underachieving. Were it not for the Toronto Maple Leafs, the Bruins would be looked at as the NHL's all-time choking team.
You ask too much of the Bruins to maintain home ice advantage by winning those first two games of a series at home. They have a much better chance--usually--of grabbing one on the road. Then they split at home, and hopefully in the end grab the game that puts them over the top. The Finals against the Blues could have had a different outcome if the Bruins didn't have home ice advantage. Home ice disadvantage for the B's is more like it.
Having said that, this team can't really choke because they're not the better team in this series and they aren't a Cup contender. They surprised and got into the playoffs. This doesn't mean that it isn't frustrating that they've scored first in all three games and trail the series 2-1. You should have more to show for those leads than that.
In 1982-83, the Bruins had the best record in the league. It felt like a magical year. But you never thought--and no one seemed to think or believe--that they were going to get past the Islanders, who had a "down" regular season I guess you could say.
Those Bruins were very fortunate to escape the Sabres in the first round of the playoffs, and only did so after rallying in Game 7 and then winning it on a Brad Park slapper in OT (anniversary yesterday). Fred Cusick had a great call. Fred Cusick and Ned Martin--I can listen to them like I listen to Bach and the Grateful Dead.
Connor McDavid had a goal and an assist last night and was -4 in a 7-4 Oilers loss to the Ducks. Sounds like McDavid to me. Arguably the most overrated alleged possible best player ever in the history of North American sports. You should probably be a winner if you're going to be touted as that kind of guy, and Connor McDavid isn't. He may win a Cup as the guy, but I wouldn't be surprised if he retires Cup-less.
Comments