3-10

Here's what I saw that worked yesterday:

--Beckett pitched.  He owns 2 of their 3 wins, and is by far the most impressive pitcher on the team.  His success now as compared to the past few years is simple to see: he's not throwing 100% fastballs (of any of the three types he throws) and he's getting his off-speed stuff over very consistently.  Before he dogheadedly threw the #1 all the time, to every hitter, and it didn't move much, so if you're a professional hitter and you're sitting on it, you can hit it.  And they did.  A lot.  Because he's throwing much more off-speed stuff (getting them over for strikes is a big plus), they can't sit dead-red.  Gives them something else to think about, and they're also not so comfortable hitting off of him.  I can see the difference in the confidence on their faces; they don't feel they can hit him as easily as before.  Now that he's getting the off-speed stuff over, they have to look for that.  But if they're looking for that, he can blow his #1 by them, thereby getting even more outs.  I'm tellin' you, it's that simple: If you can throw 93+ and get off-speed stuff over consistently, you can pitch in the major leagues.  (Another improvement is that he's not walking everyone.  Those totals are down because he's not missing with his off-speed stuff, which leads to an avalanche of positive things for him.  Dice-K should learn from this.)

--Varitek caught.  I know that one leads to the other these days, that Beckett wants Varitek catching him, but I still stand by my opinion about how important pitch-selection is.  Varitek knows all the hitters, but he can out-smart them back there, too.  (He also might be a little bit of Jake Taylor back there, too, for those of you who get the reference.)  NESN showed the stat yesterday that Varitek is 2-2 and the staff has an ERA below 3.0 when he catches.  Salty is 0-8 with an ERA over 6.  Granted that Varitek has half the control group that Salty has, but I can see what I see, and he is better back there overall.  He threw someone out yesterday, too.

--Crawford didn't play and Ellsbury didn't lead off.  Crawford will have to come around, and I feel badly about the boos he's getting, but, as he said, they should boo him, he deserves it.  But he can hit .300 and have 200 hits and 50 stolen bases, so he absolutely must come around.  Yesterday was a good mental health day for him, though.  Ellsbury looks more comfortable now batting 7-9, so I would keep him there.  I won't pretend to know what ails him; I haven't understood him for years, since just after he came up late in 2007, had a HOF second half...and then I don't know.  Sox fans don't, either.  A guy at Fenway a few nights ago (when I was there) yelled things at Ellsbury I won't repeat here, but also added the caveat that he hasn't been good for awhile now, that he had that mysterious year last year that people still whisper loudly about, and that he's only popular because women think he's handsome.  The guy wasn't all right, but he wasn't all wrong, either.  With the glut of outfielders the Sox have, I wouldn't be surprised if the brass grows disenchanted with him and trades him late in the year.  Having said that, Ellsbury's upside is only a smidgeon lower than Crawford's, and is therefore way too potentially good to give up on.  But now's the time to walk the walk.

--Jed Lowrie has always been a small favorite of mine, though I am still surprised by his hitting and defense this year, and I'm even more surprised to watch him lead off yesterday and not only go 3 for 5, but also hit scalding drives for his two outs.  I love the old-fashioned gloves hanging out of his back pocket when he hits; he's scrappy looking, weighs about 170, max, and frankly makes it look like you or I could also get a hit up there.  Jeff Frye struck me the same way, that if he can do it, I can do it.  I can't, of course, but that's undoubtedly some of Lowrie's appeal.  He looks like a throwback player, anywhere from the 1880s to the 1920s, and has the name to boot.  He's playing comfortable up there, and I think it's because he knows he's coming back next year and Scutaro isn't.  (Don't be surprised to see Scutaro traded, either.)  The SS phenom is waiting to be the starter late this year or definitely next year, so you can't keep Lowrie and Scutaro.  Lowrie can play short, second and third, and Scutaro can only play short.  Lowrie has also shown that he can hit first or second like Scutaro can.  His versatility makes him just a little more valuable than Scutaro.

--I'm not down on Scutaro, by the way.  He is what he is, which is a singles and doubles hitting, average fielding SS who can lead off or hit lower, bat .275 to .285 at the end of the year, drive in some runs with a good lineup, maybe 80 to 85, max, in a great year, and he comes to play every day.  What's not to like?  Plenty of teams could use him.  The problem for him is that the Sox can't.  Lowrie can do all those things, too, maybe a smidge better since he's younger, and he's also cheaper and has better range and versatility.  He's also never going to be any better than that, and has been that consistently for awhile now, but to the extent that, for him, there's nowhere else for him to go but down.  He's on the downside now, but I'll bet his declining years will be many, as his slow but steady descent will take a few years, too.  Still a valuable player for many teams.

--Yesterday the Sox were still terrible with RISP.  They were 2 for 12, or something like that, and left close to 11 on base again.  That has to stop.

--The umps and fans were dressed like they were watching a game in Siberia.

--Right now, it's Pedroia and Lowrie, Beckett and Lester, and pray for rain.  The core has to step up.  Now.

First Fenway Visit of 2011

Was very, very cold.  I had on a T-shirt, a Sox long-sleeved shirt, a very comfortable school sweatshirt, and a heavy black trenchcoat--and I was still cold.  Though not as cold as the Sox performance!  So a few notes of what I saw in person:

--The Fenway Faithful are quickly losing the faith.  Several booed most of the night, which isn't helpful for the players.  They're pressing enough as it is--and they ARE clearly pressing--and so putting more pressure on them by booing them is counterproductive.

--But when you're paying your mortgage to watch the games, how else can most vent their frustration?  I just shake my head and logically say what shouldn't have happened; but, in that, my friend is right when he says that, as a fan, "I'm kind of bland."

--And you're supposed to say that in your best Joe Castiglione voice--and make it very nasal.

--So Defense Exhibit A of a player pressing: Crawford, in the 7th, had a 3-1 count on him, with the bases empty, Sox down by 4.  In such a situation, you learn in high school to take that 3-1 pitch.  Always.  A solo homer by you does no good; you need to get on base, start a big inning, make things happen on the basepaths, and hope your teammates keep the line moving.  So you take that 3-1, and if it's a strike, you do what you have to on 3-2.  Plus, that's one more pitch for the reliever to throw, and the more relievers throw, the more you can get to them.  The worst thing you can do is swing at that pitch.  What's he do?  He swings and pops it up to third.  Crawford knows not to do this.  So why do it?  Because he's pressing and trying to do too much.  (Even players like Ortiz need to take on 3-1 there, though the player I'm speaking of here was Crawford, a leadoff guy.)

--Defense Exhibit B: Ellsbury gets on base in the 8th and steals second base, going to third on the errant throw.  At first I told my friend I liked the play because the Sox--yesterday and today--need a spark, anything at all to get them going.  While I still believe this, and while this example is not as egregious as the one described above because of that, you still don't steal 2nd down by 4 in the 8th inning, with your team pressing.  It's a percentage play that, had it failed, would have been disasterous for many reasons.

--The most glaring offensive problem is that they are not playing fundamental baseball when at the plate.  They are not swinging smartly, or working the count, or working the pitchers, etc.  They're flailing up there, or guessing and thinking too much up there.  At 2-10, it needs to come down to: Be smart.  Go back to basics.  And in a hitting count, don't think too much or guess: See the ball, hit the ball.

--The Sox are missing John Farrell.  And somebody needs to get on Curt Young, big-time.

--Francona sent a message to Salty by pinch-hitting Lowrie for him in the 8th.  I've said it a ton already this year, but I'll say it again: Salty is not calling a good game, and he's not hitting.  Maybe Varitek needs to be a backup, but not to this guy.  I want to see Varitek in there for at least the next 10 games.  Let's see what he can do.  He can't do any worse.

--The brand new Hi-Def screens look great, but the info. put on there is for the fan who otherwise would not know what was going on.  In other words, not the serious fan.

--The Sox don't make as much money on tickets as they do on concessions.  Our tickets were $30 each, not too bad for Fenway.  But a regular plastic cup of Coors Lite is $8, and a Sam Adams Summer Ale (perfect for last night's game) was $8.50.  A quick look around you shows you that a vast majority of the 38,000 fans had at least one.  And those who had more than one compensated for those who didn't have any, believe me.

--Jencks needs to pitch out of the stretch all the time.

--It's a mystery why J.D. Drew, with that swing, hasn't amassed 3,000 hits.  Except, of course, that he doesn't play when he gets a splinter, and he doesn't swing a vast majority of the time.  Okay, forget I said that.

--To show how unfaithful the Faithful are, when the Sox trailed by 4, the place emptied out, fast.  There was a sparse crowd after the 6th inning, and almost no one saw the 3 runs in the 8th.

--A quick look at today's news shows you that Dykstra has been arrested for stealing from himself (can't do that when you declare bankruptcy) and that he's been defrauding others for years.  Don't say I didn't tell you.  If you've forgotten, read my blog entry on him here.

--And Gooden got 5 years' probation for being high on cocaine while driving, causing an accident in which a child of his wasn't buckled in.  Call it the Curse of '86.  Buckner lives a life of guilt-free bliss compared to these guys.

Game 2--Beltre, Rangers 12 Sox 5, and More

--Still no time to panic, though you are allowed to feel a strong sense of unease.  I do.

--To state the obvious, the pitching looks to be a bit of a problem right now.  I'm more concerned about the relief pitching than the starting pitching, though you would think Lackey wouldn't leave a pitch middle in to a right handed hitter, especially one of Beltre's caliber.

--If you leave the ball up, the Rangers hitters will hit it.  Hard.  Everyone, of almost any caliber or type of pitcher, needs to keep the ball either down or away from them.  Even their 8th and 9th hitters look good.

--The worry with the starting pitching is that we haven't gotten to Beckett and Dice-K yet, who we expect to do badly.  So if the others do as well...

--It's early, but a win today is strongly needed.  You don't want to be swept during the first series of the season.

--A little perspective: The Rays lost 2 straight to the Orioles.  The Orioles are not better than the Rays, I assure you.

--Ortiz hit another homer, good for him.  Then again, so did Ian Kinsler...and Ellsbury looks good at the plate, too.  In fact, the whole Sox offense looks good, except for Crawford, who really looks like he's pressing.  I was guessing at that yesterday, but a golf-swing and miss on a pitch low and away yesterday proved it.

--The Cleveland pitching staff looks helpless.  This against the Chicago White Sox, who don't have a thunderous lineup.

--I won't look at the standings until the Sox win one.

--Lou Gorman was apparently a really nice guy.  That's always said when someone dies, but it's been the overwhelming thing that everyone's been saying about him, even before his 30 years or so in the business.  He was the GM when I first started watching baseball, in 1984, and I remember that during interview spots he would always talk very slowly, very muffled, and that he cared more about the players themselves than is usual for GMs, then or now.  He was the exact polar opposite of Dan Duquette.  I have a very vague memory of maybe talking to him--or at least he was in the same room with me--when I was at McCoy when very young.  This is back when Mike Stenhouse was involved with the team and he gave my Dad tickets, or maybe just AMICA in general.

--Dunkin' Donuts doesn't sponsor Sox games anymore?  No more Dugout?  I saw a Honey Dew commercial on NESN and I almost fell over.

--The Sox pitching coach will be earning his money starting right now.

--I want to see Varitek behind the plate today.  Let's see if he can bring the staff ERA down.  If he is in, and if Bucholz has a good game, I want to see him in there the next day, too.  Even if Salty has a batting average a 100 points higher than Varitek's, it won't be worth it if Varitek calls a superior game and takes hits and runs off the board doing so.  I believe this can happen, and that it has happened.  With the Sox lineup the way it is, they can afford a great game-caller with a weak batting average hitting ninth.

--Castig has gotten even more nasal, if that's possible.

--By the way, why's Lackey the Number 2 over Bucholz?  At this point, Lackey and Beckett are capable of each winning 20, but are presently lumbering innings-eaters.  Let's have the younger guys who've been pitching much better and winning more consistently at the top of the rotation, okay?

--If you have 3 doubles, 2 triples and 2 homers (one a grand slam) hit off you in 3 2/3 innings, now that's a bad day.

--Someone needs to keep the cameras off of pitchers during obvious f-word moments, such as Lackey's yesterday right after Beltre's slam.  They're obviously putting the lens on these guys at those moments so that we, the viewers, can see them mouthing the f-word.

--Completely unnecessary, by the way, as we are saying the same thing at the time ourselves.

--The guys next to me were very vocal against Francona, as if they expected him to pull his starting pitcher, who is getting paid about $12 million this year to win and eat innings, in the fourth inning of the second game of the year.  There's 160 of these left, guys.  Take it easy.

--I see now why sports pros from across the country say that Sox fans are unique in their rabidity for the team.  Every game really is life or death for many of these guys.  These guys yesterday were an example, confusing the second game of the year for an ALCS or World Series game.

--By the way, kudos to my better half, who sat through five innings of a game, at a local restaurant/bar, surrounded by these guys, watching her second game in a row--while not appearing tortured.  Though she still calls "uniforms" "outfits."  I tried to explain that ballplayers wear uniforms and tennis players wear outfits, but she was not deterred.

--She said that she was now a Rangers fan because they at least make things happen.  And said that all teams should use just one pitcher every day.  I took that opportunity to speak about the 1880s Providence Greys, and Old Hoss Radbourne, and how teams then did just have one pitcher, who would often win 40-60 games a season while tossing 400 to 600 innings.  Luckily she was on her second Mojito at the time and so was able to make it through my explanation without her eyes glazing over.  (I did have to explain who Nomar was.)

--Beltre 1, Sox 0 for those keeping track.

--Speaking of Beltre, I didn't know that he'd been offered a one-year, $10 million contract by the Sox last year.  Instead he signed a guaranteed 5 year, $80 million contract with the Rangers.  That's an average of $16 million a year, each year for five years, for those bad at math.  I'd turn down the Sox offer for that, wouldn't you?  Sox fans vilified him, as they had Damon when he left for much more money than the Sox offered.

--As part of that contract, Beltre makes $14 million this year, and one million more each year until 2016, when he drops back down to $16 million a year.  Included also is the stipulation that the Rangers can defer $12 million of the 2016 contract at 1% interest.  Oh, and it's in his contract that he gets uniform #29. 

--Remember that this guy was in the slush pile after 5 very bad years in Seattle, on an exorbitant contract that he landed after his one--and, at that time, only--great season with the Dodgers.  His stats that year, especially the 49 homers, are dubious when compared to those 5 terrible seasons, a drop-off that he has never fully explained.  Then one more great year, this time in Boston, and he uses that one good year again to garner an exorbitant long-term contract.  I hope he does well this year, or else this would form a very questionable pattern of behavior, if you know what I'm sayin'.

--And speaking of money, Cliff Lee said No to the Rangers this past offseason when they offered him a 6-year/$138 million contract so he could return to the Phillies.  That's an average of $23 million per year.  And he said No.  Tough to fathom, isn't it?

Carl Crawford, and Beyond

Photo: Me at Picnic in the Park, July 5th, 2009.  With the signings of Gonzalez and Crawford, I'm predicting right now that this picture shows the expected finish of the teams at the end of next year before the playoffs.  (I was going to show a picture of Ellsbury signing a ball for me, but I wasn't sure about the legalities of showing a player's image on my blog.  Please email me at the address above if you know the laws about this.)


Well, I have to say I'm surprised.  I like the signing, even at 7 years / $142 million.  I like Carl Crawford, and you'd have to say the Sox offense is on par now with the Yanks', or even better.  It also probably says goodbye to Jacoby Ellsbury, and I'm surprisingly okay with that.  There's been something up with him that the casual fan--or the more involved fan like me--doesn't know about.  A friend said to me today, "He says he's still sore," and I responded, "Yeah, literally and figuratively," because there's a lot of animosity there that hasn't come out to us.  Ellsbury is very upset with the Sox about how they treated his rib injury, and the Sox are very upset with him about how he's responded to it--and about how upset with them he is.  There's also something else, I believe (with admittedly little or no proof), that someone is hiding from us.  Some disability, or addiction, or problem, or something, that's being explained with, "Rib injury."  His ribs are definitely injured, but there's something else...

At any rate, though it would be wonderful to keep him, you now have a severe glut of outfielders.  This is a great problem to have, because a couple of them, at least, are going to be traded for relief help, and you'd have to be a fool if you didn't ask for Ellsbury in return for a really good reliever.  Drew's not going anywhere, so he'll be in right, with Kalish/McDonald/Nava backing him up--because you know his neck and back will bother him.  A lot.  Crawford will be in left, or in center; ditto for Cameron, who isn't going anywhere for the same reason Drew isn't: they're too expensive, and no one wants them.  I'd love to pawn them off on someone, but who'd take them?  The ideal situation is Drew/Kalish in right, Ellsbury/Kalish in center, and Crawford in left, though Crawford could play center for me any day.  That leads McDonald and Nava available, but I can't believe anyone would part with a high quality reliever for those two guys.  But I do believe that lots of teams would part for one, or both, of those guys, and Kalish.  I also believe lots of teams would part with a quality releiver, straight up, for Ellsbury (with McDonald or Nava thrown in, but you're overpaying for a high quality reliever if you give up Ellsbury and Kalish for one guy), especially considering Ellsbury's health concerns.

That's the point of this deal: Ellsbury, Kalish, McDonald and Nava are all expendable now, and you could get at least two high quality relievers for any combination of those guys.  Or you could just sign Kerry Wood, which I would (assuming the Sox haven't emptied the cookie jar already, which is a very real possibility), and then trade Ellsbury OR Kalish for another good reliever, with any combination of Nava and McDonald if someone insists.  (I think those two are part-time or three-quarters players, like Cameron, but Cameron even now is much better.  None of those three will ever be a full-time permanent major league player.)  I think the Sox think that Kalish is the prime player here, and would rather lose Ellsbury, for the reasons I explained above.

I'm surprised, though, about the Crawford signing  because, really, the Sox didn't need him.  With Kalish/Ellsbury/McDonald/Drew and Nava in the outfield, the Sox still were second in the majors in runs and offense last year.  They missed the playoffs because of their starting and relieving last year, plain and simple.  So they could have traded any combination of those guys for a couple of relievers--one great, one good--and they still would make the playoffs next year, if not go all the way.  They didn't need another outfielder.  This signing means that three or four of those guys definitely will go, and you'll definitely get those two relievers, and who knows what else they'll do by then?  With that relief help, and Beckett and Lackey returning to something that even a little bit resembles what they're supposed to be, and I'm writing about next year's Series winner now.

All of this also means that they're playoff contenders for the next 7 years, and that Ortiz, Papelbon, Cameron, Drew, etc. will definitely not be back after next year.  They just spent all the money they were saving by jettisoning those players by getting Crawford and Gonzalez now.  And who could blame them?  I'm okay with losing Papelbon after this coming year for the same exact reason I am about losing Ellsbury.  I'll be said to see Big Papi go, and maybe they'll resign him to a much cheaper, incentive-laden contract (which I think both sides would be very happy with), but nobody can deny that the big guy has been slipping, even if last year was a bit of a rebound from the year before.  But he's clearly not going to get better, and he's clearly not going to be able to stay at last year's level, either.  Now would be a good time for him to start slimming down, too.  Make that swing a little quicker, maybe.  Make the body last a little more.  But if you lose him after next year, and if you have a couple of those outfielders (minus Ellsbury and/or Kalish, who'll definitely be traded by then), then you can platoon them at DH, and move around the outfielders to DH to give them an occasional day off in the field, and you wouldn't lose much offensively when you tally the numbers at the end of the year.

Sox 2011--Yo, Adrian!!!

Photo: Me, in front of the Green Monster, during Picnic in the Park a couple of years ago.

Well, so here it is.  Gonzalez is a Gold Glove at first, who transplants Youkilis, who was Gold Glove at first, and moves him to third, where he may actually be a little better.  So both corner positions are Gold Glovers, which you had last year before the injuries.  Under the plan beforehand, Martinez would've been your catcher/1B, and, though a good hitter, he is defensively challenged at both positions.  Youk and Gonzalez are clearly better at 1B defensively, and are both clearly better at the plate.  So Martinez is out of the picture at first.  Now, do you pay him 4 years for $50 million to be your full-time catcher and occasional DH?  In other words, do you pay him $12.5 million for the next four years to just catch for you, knowing that you'll have to give him about 30-35 games off, minimum, per year to save the wear and tear so he can be an effective hitter?  With his questionable defense and play calling, knowing he won't be at first or DH?  No way!  If you could put him at first on his days off from catching, maybe, but even that's a stretch.  I'd want to keep him, but not for that money.  And you clearly have to get Gonzalez if he's available, because he's a better hitter and defender than Martinez.  So, once you have all this figured out, Martinez is gone.  Fine.  A shame, and you get nothing now for Justin Masterson--who I was never a fan of anyway--but that's okay with me, too.

The biggest shame out of all this is that you lose Adrian Beltre and Casey Kelly, the latter of which I think can be a future ace of a staff.  But as Brian Rose and Carl Pavano (remember those guys?  the twin sure-things who both fizzled?  Pavano's still pitching, but he clearly stuck it to the Yanks) taught you, one definite is better than one maybe, so getting Gonzalez again is a no-brainer.  The other two prospects in the deal are also potential very good players, but that's why you draft such guys--to help your team on the field (Youk; Pedroia; Papelbon) or to help you in trades (Kelly and the other two).  Remember that Pavano and Rose got you Pedro Martinez.  That worked out pretty well, right?  And if Gonzalez can be 30/100 in San Diego, in a terrible hitters park, he can be 35/120, minimum, in Fenway, and the American League in general.

So then there's Adrian Beltre, who clearly has a perfect swing--down to one knee--at Fenway, and is a Gold Glove at 3rd base, too.  And a 35/120 guy himself.  (Youk is another 120 RBI guy, with fewer home runs.)  But where do you put him?  You have to keep Youk, who's a Fenway Favorite ("YOOOOOOOKKKK") like Ortiz, Pedroia and Papelbon are.  But he had nowhere to play now in the infield, and I'm a little worried at how he only has had monster years during contract years, and his 49 homeruns one year was due to a word that we will not mention here.  That's worrisome, though in his defense I think he enjoyed Fenway and would've put up great numbers and played great defense there every year.  I will miss him, and I think Kelly (whose autograph I have somewhere) and the other two prospects will turn out to be great players, but that's the business side of the game, which is just as important as the balls and strikes.

In short, you now have great hitters and Gold Gloves at every position in the infield (except at short, but Scutaro is unspectacularly solid), and you have Gold Gloves in the outfield with Cameron (when healthy) and Gold Glove caliber with Ellsbury (when healthy) and Drew makes it all look so easy when he glides after a ball, when he feels like it, and when he graces us with his outfield presence.  I wouldn't mind seeing Ellsbury back in center, and then a platoon in right and left between Drew and Cameron, and take your pick between the guys who did a good job subbing last year.  None of those guys, including Drew and Cameron are full-time players anymore--and excluding Ellsbury--so I wouldn't mind seeing Carl Crawford out there (the Nationals overpaid sickeningly for Werth).  BUT, you have to replenish your relief corps first, and if you do that and then don't have enough money left to sign Crawford, I am totally okay with that.  They fielded practically a minor league team last year in the outfield for most of the year, and were still second in the majors in offense, so they don't need another outfielder.  Get Beckett and Lackey back on track, and get a solid middle reliever or two, and if that's all you do, you're still going deep in the playoffs next season.