The good news is the team's best relievers - Keith Foulke and Jonathan Papelbon - are rested. And I mean well rested.
Would someone please explain to me why exactly we are seeing Martin Van Buren, David (don't call me Risky) Riske and all the others in the last innings of these big division games, and not Foulke or Papelbon?
Oh, I get it. You cannot bring those guys in unless the team is ahead.
See where this leads? In about 40% of your games, the team is going to be behind late in the game. If you stick to the silly, outdated idea that your best pitchers only see the light of day when the game is tied or your club is in the lead, you will live to regret it. Take Monday night, for example. The Sox battled back from a 6-0 deficit to tie the game in the eighth inning. However, instead of bringing in Foulke or Papelbon to keep the Jays at bay the Sox went with Riske. Boom - a double and a single later the game is lost.
More of the same last night. The Sox battle back to make the game close - 7-5. But instead of bringing in Foulke, at least, the Sox go with Riske and he allows an insurance home run.
I continue to believe Papelbon is being seriously misused, not to mention underused, in the role of relief pitcher. But I suppose that battle has been lost. Seeing him hardly used at all (fewer than 15 innings in May) is just in excusable. There is no reason why he has to assume the Dennis Eckersley role - that is, the role whereby he never sees the light of day unless its a closing situation or he needs mop-up time to stay sharp. Tie game, eighth inning against a division foe? USE HIM!
]]>What is the number of which we speak? Nine
For those that do not know, that is the number of innings that Jonathan Papelbon has pitched in the month of May.
Don't you see? This business of using perhaps the best young arm in the game as a "closer" is pure madness. Madness on such a scale that I can barely bring myself to watch any game other than one started by Curt Schilling or Josh Beckett, because I cannot stop thinking that whoever is on the hill is taking Papelbon's rightful place in the rotation.
Just when we thought this team was going to eschew all of baseball's outdated modes of thinking, we see this. Can you imagine Roger Clemens being used as a closer in 1986? No doubt he would have done well, closing out for Boyd, Hurst, Nipper and the others. But would the team have won the division and later the league title? Not a chance.
Starters win games. Period. Look at the Sox. The club is 8-2 in games started by Schilling, and 6-3 in games started by Beckett. That is a combined record of 14-5. Excellent. In games started by the others - Tim Wakefield, David Wells, Lenny DiNardo and Lord knows who else, the club is below .500 - 12-13. That is why the team as a whole, despite having two terrific starters who are nine games over .500 on their own, is only 26-18.
Imagine if Papelbon started, and was even 75% as effective in the role as he has been as a closer. You are possibly looking at a record of - at worst - 6-3 - in his starts. In that event, the team is maybe 29-15, a much better record.
Using Papelbon as a closer is a catastrophic mistake. Nothing in recent years compares to it. The Hanley Ramirez situation (not just the trade, but the fact that Renteria was signed with this kid tearing up the minors) is for another day, but at least in that case the team acquired a great pitcher.
For a while, I convinced myself that something else was a work here - perhaps a long term plan to ease JP into the rotation by limiting his innings in the early part of the season. But it’s obvious he was the closer all along. After all, why would Foulke be given the boot out after blowing ONE save? No way a team as forward thinking as this one does that without some advance planning.
And JP himself appears to have joined the bandwagon. He recently said “I don’t even think of starting anymore. I am a closer now.” That’s great. Guess his agent got to him and told him that the closer role is the easiest path to riches in major league sports. Why pitch 225 innings to earn $10 million when a team is willing to give you the same money to pitch 65?
Here is what really irks me. The Sox already have played seven very significant games against the Yankees, all of which have a two-game swing in the standings. JP has pitched in four of them for a combined 4.1 innings, during which he has allowed no hits, and has struck out five. That sounds almost like evidence that he was used effectively, if all four were saves of close games, but consider this: three of those four appearances were of, at best, modest significance. Indeed, two of them came in losses.
May 1 – JP pitches ninth inning in 7-3 win.
May 10 – JP pitches ninth inning to hold the fort in a 7-3 loss.
May 11 – JP earns a big save in 5-3 win.
May 23 – JP pitches ninth inning to hold the fort in 7-5 loss.
Imagine if JP could pitch as he has against the Yankees, but do so as a starter. Is there any possibility that the Sox lose last night’s game against Randy Johnson? Is there anyone who seriously thinks that using arguably your hardest-throwing and most effective Yankee killer in four innings of seven huge games is a good idea, especially when two of those performances were of the “hold the fort variety?”
It gets worse if you keep looking at it. Fifteen saves sounds great - BUT - let us be honest here. Ten of those saves (66%) involved leads of two runs or more, and six of them (40%) involved leads of three runs, the maximum allowed for earning a save of less than three innings. How many of those ten large lead saves would have been blown up and turned to losses by say, Mike Timlin? Even if he blew two (statistically not likely), it still might of have been worth it if Papelbon was 6-3 as a starter.
It is clear what has happened. Fear. Baseball executives and managers alike fear blowing a ninth inning lead almost more than anything. It is a consequence of managing in an era where complete games have vanished. In the old days, a starter pitched the ninth. If he lost the lead in the ninth, he lost the lead in the ninth. To him, and the team, it was a loss - nothing more, nothing less. BUT, now that ninth inning leads are turned over to someone else, that person is defined solely by how well they do in that inning, and that, consequently, reflects on the front office and manager. Since blowing a ninth inning lead is - I confess - traumatic under any circumstances, a team almost would prefer to lock up close wins than gamble that same pitcher might produce more wins on the front end as a starter.
The result of this - I fear - is that the Sox will end the season having nurtured a great closer. JP will have 47 saves, maybe 1-2 blown, and make the All Star team. Of course, the Sox either will be out of the playoffs, or get knocked off early, but they'll have their closer.
I am old enough to remember Dave Righetti, the lefty pitcher for the Yankees. He was a decent, promising lefty starter - compiling a 14-8 record in 1983 at age 24, including a no-hitter on July 4 against the Sox. Well, the following year, he was converted to a closer, and he did ok, compiling annual save totals for several years in the 25-35 range. But it is interesting to note that in all the years he pitched for the Yanks as a closer (1984-1990), the team never made the playoffs. I am not putting all that on his shoulders, but it certainly suggests that having a good closer guarantees little.
I have said my piece. I am not going to let this get me down. If the team wants to throw away a once-in-ten year talent like this, let 'em. I don't have to like it, and I don't have to defend it.
]]>1) Dallas-San Antonio Game 4 was one of the best games I've seen in a long time. Overtime, great shots, ex-Mav Michael Finley hitting two huge threes in Dallas. Avery Johnson's two point guard offense against his ex-coach George Popovich who has switched his starting lineup in response - and two questionable calls in Dallas' favor. Followed up by Game 5 where Tim Duncan hits his first twelve shots. SA wins by one. Dallas had a chance but missed, Dirk tries to tap the rebound in two-handed but misses. The champs are still one game from elimination but the Mavs will play Game 6 without Jason Terry whose huge mistake punching Finley may cost the Mavs dearly.
2) Game 5 in Phoenix - Double OT. Nicholson in the front row - how does he do that? Phoenix winning despite a ton of mistakes by two tired teams near the end. In the series Mike Dunleavy has done an incredible job devising a scheme to stop Steve Nash. Reminds me of the 1979 Michigan State "ball defense" which was so effective against Larry Bird and others. Not enough is made of Amare Stoudimire being out - in the Nets series they mentioned Clifford Robinson's 5 game suspension every other minute. Here they rarely do - a tribute to Nash, Mike D'Antoni and everyone else. Without him though, the Clippers are clearly the better team. Question is their effectiveness in closing out games.
3) Cleveland beats Detroit in Detroit in Game 5 despite a huge mental lapse by Tony Snow who grabbed a rebound/loose ball after Detroit's seemingly final shot and inexplicably throws it down court where a Detroit player runs it down, calls time and the Pistons get it at halfcourt with 1.9 seconds left. Now Detroit faces a Game 6 on the road and LeBron James looks at making history.
4) Miami winning Game 5 despite a great effort by NJ - who double-teamed Dwayne Wade at the top of the key down the stretch - as KC Jones did against Michael Jordan in Game 3 of the 1986 Celtics-Bulls series.
A few more observations:
The coaching has been excellent. Dunleavy’s scheme on Nash, Avery Johnson’s starting two point guards, D’Antoni somehow keeping Phoenix competitive without Stoudimire, Eddie Jordan’s adjustment on Wade and Pat Riley’s effective use of the Heat personnel.
Bill Walton and Snapper Jones remain the greatest color team in basketball. Walton was great last night in a largely one-sided game. Talks like fans do when we're kidding around about sports - "biggest game in the history of Clipper Nation." "The crowd rising to its feet as one" - "biggest game in the history of the Maverick franchise." "Steve Nash and Bill Russell are the same person.”
One more thing - for pure basketball – there can be no debate - these games blow away any game in this year's NCAA tournament. It’s a no-brainer.
]]>
They obviously forget the old days, when the Red Sox were managed by old geezers who took pride in managing by hunch, filling their staffs with old drinking buddies instead of qualified coaches, and ignoring statisical data regarding their own players as well as opponents. As recently as 2003, when Grady Little was at the helm, the club was still mostly in the Stone Age when it came to decision-making during games.
Last night, Francona made a nice little move, or should I say non-move, one many managers would make - to be sure - but one that many fans, if given the chance to manage for a night, would not have. With two outs in the eighth inning, and a man in scoring position with two outs, Francona declined to pinch hit for his weak-hitting shortstop, Gonzalez, and instead let him hit against the hard-throwing Orioles reliever, Chris Ray. Francona, naturally, was thinking ahead to the ninth inning and he wanted to keep his best defensive infielder in the game. Of course, he popped out, and a valuable opportunity to drive in an insurance run was off the board.
The following inning, with Papelbon on the hill trying to earn the save, Terry's non-move was vindicated when, with one out, Gonzalez made a truly great play - not a spectacular play - a great play - against Nick Markakis. He fielded a grounder in the hole to his right and immediately, against the momentum of his body moving toward the outfield, made an almost perfect throw to first base for the out. Almost any Red Sox shortstop since Rick Burleson would not have made the play - it would have been a chore for any current backup. The second out thus was made, and when Papelbon induced another grounder to short you knew it was over.
The decision to leave Gonzalez in will not go in any scorebook. But it was wise, and Francona deserves credit for having made it.
Now about his decision not to use Papelbon as a starter ....
]]>I like TIm Wakefield. I have always said it makes sense to start him. He's like the stock market - better to keep investing in him on a regular basis because eventually, he'll get hot and you'll make more than you lose over time. But this passed ball thing is as much his problem as it is the catcher's. Yes, Mirabelli eventually got used to it, but most catchers throughout history have struggled with knuckleballs. I remember an otherwise very steady Mike McPharlane have fits with Wakefield. Something has to be done, as the passed balls are coming at really bad times. Criticizing Bard won't help.
Jonathan Papelbon must be moved into the rotation now. I don't care how many talk show hosts and pundits contend that "moving him would weaken the bullpen." Its a dumb argument. If a guy can pitch well it makes sense to put him in there as much as possible. The Sox have lost two straight series. Throwing Papelbon out there every fifth day would significantly decrease the likelihood of that happening very often.
The hitting has been fair at best. The Sox rank 17th in the all of MLB in runs scored; 22nd in slugging percentage and just 16th in OPS (combined slugging plus on base percentage). Those are pretty bad numbers for a team that plays in Fenway Park and has a $100 million plus payroll.
The problems at the bottom of the order have drawn much attention. Old friend Bill Mueller (who I pointed out had totals almost identical to Johnny Damon) is off to a great start with the Dodgers - in 22 games he's got an on base percentage of .435 and a slugging percentage of .493, making his OPS a nifty .928 (27th in the National League). But to lay all the blame at the lower end of the order would be a mistake. Several Sox players haven't done much. Varitek looks pretty bad - his OPS is just .693 (67th in the league). Loretta has been worse - his OPS is .601 (87th in the league). Gonzalez has been horrific, compiling an OPS of just .540 (93rd in the league). These guys are not all at the bottom of the order, they are spread throughout, so rallies are getting killed throughout the game.
I remain optimistic that with the return of Coco Crisp, the offense eventually will be good enough. And there is always a chance that the team might seek help via trade. Yes, this is a flawed team, certainly no juggernaut. But there is time to do the right things to make it better. Putting Papelbon in the rotation would be a good start.
]]>
2) Is Adam Stern better than Willie Harris? If he is why isn’t he on the team – at least until Coco Crisp returns?
3) Do you honestly believe Rudy Seanez, Julian Tavares and David Riske are appreciably better than Manny Delcarmen? If not, why did you commit valuable financial resources to average relievers?
4) Do you ever foresee a time when the Sox start the season with an under 25 position player from your farm system in the Opening Day lineup? Or are the days of Yaz, Fisk, Lynn, Rice, Greenwell, Burks, Nomar etc., gone forever?
5) Craig Hansen is older than Houston Street. Why is he in Double A?
6) Jonathan Papelbon is older than Josh Beckett. If we concede he has to be a closer for now, do you feel any regret at all for not starting him from the outset this year?
7) Does Kevin Youkilis’ early season success make you wish the Sox had played him earlier? Or are you satisfied that he could not have played regularly before his 27th birthday?
8) Can a rookie beat out a veteran? Can the Red Sox say a rookie is better than the player we have at the position and he’s going to play? As an example see Nomar/John Valentin.
9) Since the new Sox ownership took over and you became GM, the Sox seem to have had more success signing hitters than pitchers – other than the obvious choices of Schilling and Foulke. Is this unique to the Sox or common in MLB?
10) In hockey they call a game against a division rival a 4-point game - 2 your team can get and 2 the other team can’t if you win. Why don’t the Sox treat Yankee games this way? It appears to be simple math but there is a huge disconnect between the Sox and the fans on this one.
]]>
WEEI’s ratings are high among its target demographic – guys that follow the Red Sox, Patriots, Celtics, Bruins and major local college teams. And judging from the number of calls that come in from other parts of the globe, many people listen to WEEI internationally on the internet. In short, the station is a hit.
I am not here to slam WEEI. The listeners, by and large, seem pleased with its content. The owners of the station are making money. People that do not care for the station’s style have alternatives – there is satellite radio, as well as a sports radio station forty miles to the south that has decent hosts, guests, the whole bit.
No, I am here today to discuss business. The baseball business that is. In particular, does it make sense for the Red Sox, a privately held team with no ownership ties to the station, to be so cozy with WEEI?
For a moment we will put aside the fact that the team has given WEEI the right to serve as its flagship station for play-by-play radio broadcasts of Red Sox games. No doubt the contract, which is quite lucrative from the team’s perspective, contains obligations on the club’s part to provide the station access to various players and club personnel, all of whom become in essence part of the station’s programming offering to listeners.
No, I am talking instead about all the other stuff. If you listen to the station, you know what I mean. General Manager Theo Epstein and President Larry Lucchino each have a weekly interview segment during the busy morning rush hour. Principal owner John Henry appears on air during evening drive time a few times a year, usually when something pretty big happens. Players like Curt Schilling and the manager, Terry Francona, have weekly gigs with various hosts. Other players appear for occasional interviews. I assume that most of these appearances are voluntary, even if the interviewees are being compensated, and they are undertaken as part of the team’s perceived need to publicize its activities.
Indeed, there is no question that radio appearances feed the fans’ need to hear Red Sox brass and players talk, as regularly and frequently as possible, about the team, its prospects, goals, etc. The gigs, in essence, are part of the product.
But sometimes WEEI takes a position that fans the flames of discontent in Red Sox Nation. Take one story that had legs during spring training. One day, I turned the station on at least ten times, and on at least eight of those occasions I stumbled upon an endless discussion about whether Manny Ramirez’ failure to arrive prior to March 1 is a major problem for the ball club, its psyche, whatever. No matter how many players insisted it was no big deal, the station’s on air personalities almost to a man disagreed. When Sox GM Theo Epstein was rumored to be returning from his temporary “retirement”, it was the same thing – “his return will make the team look ridiculous,” said one host – over and over and over. (Both stories, in the wake of the team’s fine start, are long forgotten.)
And the owners are not spared. To the credit, I suppose, of the station and its personalities, Henry’s hat, voice and strange mannerisms all have been the subject of ridicule, despite the team’s apparent cooperation with WEEI management.
This type of thing – letting the public in on the back story - obviously has its supporters among programming gurus. Take American Idol, for example. The show has sky-high ratings. Even during the audition phase, millions watch in rapt attention. Still, of the thousands of hours of footage shot at the auditions, evaluation sessions, etc., featuring attractive and talented young people from every corner of the country, the producers generally choose to spend about half of the allotted time showing hideously bad performances, petty comments from losing contestants, infighting between the judges – even bits about the criminal records of various participants. In other words, people who know a lot about these things seem to believe that there is an audience for this kind of stuff; that the product alone - talented young amateur singers strutting their stuff - is simply not enough to draw a big audience. Is it possible that a similar conclusion has been drawn by the Red Sox and their PR advisors? Has some sort of bizarre, devil’s bargain been struck between the team and WEEI?
Whatever a PR guru might think about all this, I question whether these soap opera stories really are a valuable part of the publicity machine of a baseball team. Of course, intelligent fans are always going to want to hear club officials discuss the team’s plans for the future, proposed trades, etc. But is the whining and complaining and questioning that fills the hours on WEEI really good for the Red Sox? Does it make people respect the team more, dig deeper into their pockets for tickets or gear, or watch more games on the club-owned television channel?
I don’t really have the answers to these questions, but a few comments made recently by Epstein and Lucchino, combined with some new policies they have adopted, suggest to me that they have their doubts. First, there was the vague announcement by the club that hence forth, public discussion of trades, negotiations, etc., will be subject to tighter controls. Second, when asked a few weeks back whether there was anything he could learn from the Patriots success, Epstein said “of course,” and then he proceeded to talk mainly about the football team’s ability to “deliver a consistent message from the top of the organization down through the coaches and players.”
Not long after I started this piece, I saw a note on the Globe business pages suggesting that the team is looking at the possibility of creating its own radio station. To that story, I offer the following – well, duh? Sounds like a pretty good idea. A Red Sox radio station, operated with some independence to maintain integrity but nonetheless ultimately subject to club control, could serve as the flagship station for play-by-play coverage as well as a forum for talk shows, club interviews and the like. It would probably be a smashing success and a cash cow for sponsors eager to align themselves with a team that could offer access to Fenway Park, meet-and-greets with players and coaches, etc.
Oh sure, the Sox are not stupid. They would hire sports talk show hosts and give them some authority to question and criticize. That’s baseball. I listen to NFL radio on Sirius all the time and they have plenty of guys that talk about all sorts of negative things about the teams. BUT, and it’s a big but, there is a line they do not cross. They do not ridicule, and they do not speculate about sensitive issues. And they sure as heck wouldn’t beat to death some story about some player showing up three days late for spring training.
A Red Sox radio station would be a blow to WEEI, but the station would simply go forward and turn the heat up even higher. In the end, it might be good for the fans. An end to the sports radio monopoly and an even freer reign on the part of the unaffiliated radio station to continue slamming the club at every opportunity.
]]>Solid starting pitching. Right now, Schilling and Beckett are one of the best one-two punches in the game.
Some great plays in the field. Tuesday, Red Sox players made ESPN's number one and two "web jems." Is that a first? Probably.
An offense that has been good-enough. Yes, Manny has yet to get rolling and losing Coco Crisp and Trot Nixon is troubling. But I refuse right now to believe that this team is going to struggle offensively for any extended period of time.
There have been some big moves this week. Crisp's new contract is right out of the old Indians mold. Sign a guy well before free agency to a long term deal, at good but not crazy money, and keep him off the market an extra season. Both sides walk away with security, and the club avoids those messy, unpleasant salary arbitration proceedings.
David Ortiz's signing is good news for fans also. Is it me, or is the guy starting to look like the Latin American Babe Ruth? The big body; the funny trot; the mammoth shots; the larger-than-life presence - even the face bears a resemblance. He is a special player. Will he break down physically? Possibly, but for now he's pretty good and he shows no sign of slowing down.
Terry Francona is growing on me. He seems very comfortable in the manager's job. I have been waiting all my life for the Red Sox to keep a manager in the job longer than a season of the Soprano's, and Tito just might be the guy. For one, he's proven that he can lead the team to a title. Two, you rarely hear players speak ill of him, even after they leave. Three, he seems to go along with most of the stuff required of a modern manager - focusing on trends, platoons, situational changes and the like. And he is gutsy when he has to be. How many past managers would have said "Foulke is my closer" and kept bringing him out there in the ninth, even after he showed he was not back to his former, stellar form? I'll tell you - most of them. Yet Francona didn't, and we should tip our $25 opening day caps to him.
So keep smiling Sox fans, things look fine. And fine is good enough.
]]>But enough with the hysteria. Especially the celebrating over the Yankees' pitiful showing out west, where they posted a 2-4 record.
The fact is, things that happen early in the season are always grossly overrated. Even the worst teams in baseball will win five of six games many times during the course of the season. Winning five of six out of the gate means about as much as it would mean if the club did it in July.
But - and this is a large "but" - this is not to say that there have not been some really positive signs. The starting pitching has been mostly solid. Two good starts by Schilling, one by Beckett and one by Wakefield. Clement allowed four runs in his start, but he kept the Orioles scoreless through six innings. Five of six good starts. The Sox will take that level of performance any time.
Defensively, the club has made several big plays. Ramirez, Crisp and others have made the highlight film on more than one occasion. Spectacular catches don't necessarily evidence a great defensive team, but they don't hurt. And when there are a lot of them at minimum you can give the club props for being entertaining.
The offense - with Ramirez, Ortiz and Varitek in the middle of the order - has been, and should continue to be, just fine. The big thing with the offense is health - so long as Manny, Big Papi and the other key starters are available and unimpaired there is no rational reason to expect them not to put solid numbers.
Its almost a baseball cliche but the fact is, like any modern team, the big question with the Sox remains the bullpen. Timlin has looked pretty good in the set up role, and Papelbon has been almost unhittable as the closer. I think closers are vastly overrated, but I also think Oswald acted alone, and I haven't had anymore luck convincing people of that either. The team wants to have someone in the closer role, and right now Foulke is a few great appearances away from showing he can reclaim the job.
One negative has been middle relief, where Seanez and company have failed to impress. Here's my feeling about that. For the last few years, the bullpen has changed dramatically from April to mid-season. It won't surprise me at all if some of the guys they have there now are answers to trivia questions by July 1, if not sooner. I expect them to hang around a while, but if they are not effective there is almost no chance they will remain with the club. In other words, the risk of them doing long term damage to the Sox' prospects is low.
Now let's turn to the Yankees for a minute. Does anybody really expect them to stumble around and play .500 ball? People forget - they did this last year, when they were baseball's streakiest team by a wide margin. Win 9 of 11; lose 4 of 5; win 20 of 25; lose 8 of 12; that sort of thing. Eventually, the good streaks outweighed the bad and there they were, atop the division leaderboard come late September.
So here is the deal - be happy the Red Sox are winning. Be happy the Yankees are losing. But don't focus on the big picture just yet, its way to early to count anybody in, or out.
]]>I still think this is a club built more than anything else to score runs. So it was good to see that discussions with Roger Clemens continue. Its obvious that there is some serious courting going on here, and the Rocket is doing everything he can not to upset the positive atmosphere. In his surprisingly lengthy quotes from yesterday, he spoke glowingly of the Sox, and his time with the club all those years ago. There were no references to Dan Duquette; no references to his "entering the twilight of his career;" no references to fans booing him mercilessly in his many returns wearing opponent's uniforms. True, he could just be keeping his options open, but Beantown makes a lot of sense. The guy loves money, so it will have to be there, but he also is a student of history, and he knows that a return to his original club will be a story unlike any other.
We'll keep our eye out for any word on how this proceeds. Stay tuned.
]]>I think this angle has been slightly overblown. The core of the Red Sox the last several seasons has been Manny Ramirez, David Ortiz, Jason Varitek, Trot Nixon, Bill Mueller and Johnny Damon. Four of those six players return in 2006.
The other positions, first base, second base and shortstop, have been revolving doors in recent years. First base has belonged at various times to Kevin Millar, John Olerud and others. Second base has been manned by Todd Walker, Pokey Reese, Mark Bellhorn and Tony Graffanino. Shortstop - since Nomar left, has been a trip also. Orlando Cabrera, followed by the late, great Edgar Renteria.
Still, since there have been some changes its always fun to compare year to year and see whether we think there's been an upgrade.
Coco Crisp (CF) - I love this guy. His numbers, and age (26), tell me that he's going to make people forget Johnny Damon in no time. He is not Rickey Henderson - that is, he will not get on base over forty percent of the time, but he'll be plenty good enough with speed and a little power. Damon, on the other hand, is due for a decline. (SLIGHT UPGRADE)
Mark Loretta (2B) - The Sox must see second base as a spot where you can put an aging guy who can provide some offense at relatively low cost, because that's what they've been doing there since Walker arrived a few years back. Loretta fits that mold nicely. If he is over his recent health problems, he should be an upgrade offensively. One more thing - when is someone going to mention the classic Beantown punk classic from the 70's, "Talk To Loretta" by the Nervous Eaters? I still have the single in my juke box. (SLIGHT UPGRADE)
David Ortiz (DH) - Doesn't he remind you more and more of the Bambino? He is a phenomenal offensive player, showing no signs of slowing down. My only concern - most Red Sox stars eventually turn sour. Its an iron law - think of Williams, Yaz, Rice, Boggs, Roger, Nomar, Mo, Pedro. The media get to them, and they get grumpy. This guy's greatest contribution to the team could be overcoming that trend and setting a great example for the others. (NO CHANGE)
Manny Ramirez (LF) - They just can't get rid of this guy. Oh well, I guess we are just going to have to suffer through another season of 40 home runs, 120 RBI and a high OBP. Yes, there were times last year when he went to sleep for a while - but by the end the numbers were there. If he's around in 2007, we will have to start worrying about his age - but I say he's got one more historic year in him. (NO CHANGE)
Trot Nixon (RF) - When I penned a column for Masslive a few years back, I loved this guy and promoted him every chance I got. I'm done. Staying healthy is part of the deal - whether its his fault or not is beside the point. Yes, there are certain situations when I still want to see him up there (Yankee Stadium against a righty comes to mind), but most of the time he's just a gimpy guy with modest power. A nice what-might-have-been kind of player, but that's all. (SLIGHT DECLINE)
Jason Varitek (C) - Eventually, a catcher breaks down. True, Varitek is a tough guy, but at times last year his bat seemed slow and its inevitable that we will eventually see a decline in production. With my April, rose-colored glasses firmly in place, I say he's fine. For now. (NO CHANGE)
Mike Lowell (3B) - This is a pure guess. He's produced at high levels in the past, but last year was a bust. He started poorly this spring, but came on with a vengeance late. As one Globe columnist pointed out, Bill Mueller was a pretty good offensive player (about like Damon). No superstar, but no liability either. The rose-colored glasses come off for this one. (SLIGHT DOWNGRADE)
Kevin Youkalis (IB) - This is likely to be a rough-platoon with J.T. Snow getting a fair amount of time, ala Olerud. Youkalis - formerly known as the Greek God of Walks - will be expected to get on base and provide some spark at the bottom of the order. Snow is a decent offensive player with a good glove. (SLIGHT UPGRADE)
Alex Gonzalez (SS) - His history suggests that although he will not get on base with great regularity, he will hit for occasional power. I like that. It means from time to time he actually might hit a home run when they need it. I have a theory, born of experience, that players acquired mostly for their defense lose their luster very quickly - fans and club officials lose patience with all the outs. But overall, Gonzalez for Renteria is a good move. (SLIGHT UPGRADE)
So there you have it - four slight upgrades, two slight downgrades and three positions where I see no change. For an offense that already was among the best in the game, I think that's pretty good.
]]>Let us hope, for Adam Vinitieri's sake, that the parallels end here. Orr was injured immediately after arriving in the Windy City, and he was never the same.
]]>
What is surprising is that the Red Sox traded Arroyo for a player – Reds outfielder Wily Mo Pena - that seems to stand for everything Bill James, Epstein and company loathe – a guy that looks the part, but does not produce.
Indeed, on WEEI yesterday Epstein sounded positively Dan Duquette-like, raving about Pena’s physique, power, potential and “tools.” Anytime you hear talk about a player’s “tools” your alarm bells had better ring, because chances are the word is being employed to justify either acquiring, or hanging onto, a player that hasn’t put up numbers worth mentioning.
One recalls the excess praise Duquette heaped upon the Adonis-like Wes Chamberlain when the club acquired him back in the ‘90’s. Chamberlain looked like a guy that should have been a perennial All-Star. Big, strong, Dave Winfield-like. Problem was he couldn’t hit before he showed up in Fenway, and couldn’t hit once he got there. He was out of baseball shortly thereafter.
Pena’s career numbers are as curious as they are unimpressive. His on base percentage is just over .300 (.303), which is remarkably bad. Certainly in the bottom five percent of outfielders. And although his raw power produced 45 home runs in his last 647 at bats, he accumulated only 27 doubles during that time and struck out 224 times, or more than once every three at bats. That sounds like a guy who rarely makes contact, but is strong enough to muscle one out when he does. And it also looks like a major departure from the club's philosophy of acquiring players that have good strike zone discipline - Bellhorn, Mueller, Loretta - regardless of their physical attributes.
So what does Pena have going for him? Well, he’s big, strong and young – just 24. And as Epstein points out in his defense, Pena was drafted in his teens and has spent little time in the minors learning the game from the ground up. The theory is there is still a lot of room for him to grow.
Nice try, Theo, but I am not sure how we solve that problem now. After all, Pena supposedly is slated to make the big club and platoon with Trot Nixon, which means Pena will get maybe 200 or so at bats, all of them in the Fenway pressure cooker. Hardly a minor league training experience. And although his best years could be ahead of him (the whole late twenties thing), getting to those years may prove difficult if his production stays near the level it has reached to date.
David Ortiz recently played with Pena in winter ball, and he raves about his power and work ethic. That’s good. But I just can’t think of too many guys that significantly turned their games around like Pena needs to in order to succeed with the Red Sox. The bottom line is this – I don’t think this is John Tudor for Mike Easler, but it could be one of those unnecessary gambles the Sox regret a year or two down the road.
]]>For the Red Sox to contend in 2006, conventional wisdom dictates that the team needs Curt Schilling healthy and winning games. Schilling was magnificent in 2004, posting a 21-6 record with an ERA of 3.26 in 226 innings. And his exploits in the postseason are the stuff of legend – the bloody sock in game six of the ALCS, and the heroic win on a blustery night in game two of the World Series where he could barely walk.
Unfortunately, Schilling’s momentous achievement in 2004 contributed to an ankle problem that cost him almost the entire 2005 campaign. The right-hander compiled just 93 innings pitched last year, mostly in relief, with limited effectiveness. He recently claimed on sports radio that he seriously contemplated retirement.
After a difficult off season of non-stop rehabilitation, Schilling threw against the BC Eagles baseball team yesterday and looked good. He struck out three and reported no serious problems. That’s really good news for Sox fans, because the team needs – perhaps expects – that he will find a way to make it all work out despite the severity of his injury and the normal wear and tear that comes with age.
Schilling is an interesting player. He is on the verge of 200 career wins, a serious achievement. His numbers are good – he has appeared in close to 3000 innings, tenth among active pitchers behind first ballot Hall of Famers Roger Clemens, Greg Maddox and Randy Johnson and six others. Another season or two and he will reach the top 100 all time for innings pitched. His best stat is his strikeout to walk ratio, which is otherworldly. For his career, Schilling has 2832 strikeouts and 660 walks, a ratio of 4.3 to 1, third in all of baseball history behind Ireland-born Tommy Bond and Pedro Martinez. (This means in 2004, the Sox had the two, all-time greatest strikeout-to-walk pitchers in modern history.)
Schilling’s notoriety results from his having played in a lot of big games. Unlike some stars, who go an entire career largely outside the spotlight, Schilling has found his way into four postseasons (he sat out the 2005 Division Series), and three World Series. In those situations, he has delivered. He has 7 postseason wins in 15 starts with an ERA of 2.06 (take away his disastrous start in game one of the 2004 ALCS and he’d be under 2.00). And on the biggest stage of all, the World Series, Schilling has a record of 3-1 with an ERA of 2.11 in six starts.
Still, official, individual honors largely have eluded him. He has appeared in six All Star games, and he was the 2001 World Series MVP with the Diamondbacks. But he has never won a Cy Young Award, despite three twenty-win seasons. In fact, in his entire career he has only gotten two first place votes.
I think Curt Schilling has had a career worthy of the Hall of Fame. Unless he continues into his forties ala Roger Clemens and achieves great success in doing so, his win total – just over 200 – will put him on the low end of the spectrum. This will only be highlighted by the fact that some guys with crazy win totals like Clemens (341), Maddox (318), Tom Glavine (275) and Johnson (263) will be up for a vote at about the same time and make his numbers look less stellar by comparison. Still, one must take due note of Schilling’s incredible notoriety, his track record of postseason success, and his undeniable place in the recent history of the game.
If Schilling can deliver more goods in 2006, it will be great for the Red Sox and great for his place in history.
]]>Both players were right-handed starting pitchers. Both came from National League clubs, and therefore were something of a mystery to American League players and fans. Both were young. Beckett will be twenty-six on All-Star Day, the same age Pedro was in his first campaign with the Sox. Both arrived with some injury concerns. Perhaps most importantly, both pitchers were acquired based in large part on the assumption that they would get a whole lot better in the future. (It is common knowledge that players peak in their late twenties.)
Pedro made good on his promise, posting Hall of Fame numbers in four of his first five seasons with the Sox. The question facing Red Sox fans is whether they can expect a similar kind of performance from Beckett.
Pedro arrived in Beantown with impressive numbers - a career record of 65-39 (.625) and an ERA of 3.02 in 120 starts, most of which had been with marginal teams. Beckett comes to town with a career record of 41-34 and an ERA of 3.46 in 103 starts (.546). Beckett’s numbers are good, but not Pedro-like.
Looking a little deeper, it appears in hindsight that Pedro was poised to really turn in up in 1998-2001. His last season with the Expos was spectacular. His ERA was 1.90, and he rang up 305 strikeouts and just 67 walks in what is still a career-high 241 innings. In other words, Martinez came aboard on the heels of a season for the ages.
Beckett has done well, but his achievements have been more modest, even recently. Last year, he posted an ERA of 3.37, 11th in the league. Not bad, but not otherworldly either. More concerning is the fact that he worked only 178 innings. Among the league’s top twenty pitchers measured by ERA, Beckett ranked 19th, and 39th in the league as a whole. Even old, “sore-armed” Pedro made it to 15th in the league with 217 innings pitched, and the Greatest Right-Handed Pitcher in the History of Major League Baseball himself - Roger Clemens - was 20th with 211.
Beckett’s innings total reflects two stints on the disabled list – one for a blister on his pitching hand and another for a left oblique strain. He finished strong, so it appears he got over these problems, but one has right to be concerned about the guy’s durability. Note – despite posting just 178 innings last year, that total was his career high.
Don’t get me wrong, Beckett is good. Darned good. As a Sox fan, I’m glad to have him. His price - $4.25 million – is positively bargain basement. I’m just saying that Red Sox fans would be wise not to expect him to carry too big a load in 2006. And as for his upside, it would be great if he could get up to 210 innings, and maintain his ERA around 3.30 in the American League. Expecting more than that, this year, is wishful thinking.
]]>