The Sox So Far

Photo: taken by Matt Stone, from bostonherald.com, Nov. 17, 2011


Well, it's been a very long time.  And I won't lie: Posts on this blog will be sporadic.  But I have some quick Sox and baseball thoughts, and I was at Fenway twice this past week, for both Rangers games, so here we go...

--I have a sick Fenway losing streak, possibly about 10 or more games, including the last two Rangers games.  The first game I go to after seeing 7 of their last 15 home losses last year was the 18-3 debacle the other day.  Thanks, guys.

--That was my nephew's first Fenway game ever, too.  Bleh!  But we saw a Ted Williams-distance homer from Josh Hamilton land close to us, and an Adrian Gonzalez homer in the bottom of the eighth land very close to us.  This after I told my nephew not to even bother with a glove, because we'll never see a homer come close to us in Section One.  Those were maybe the longest I've seen at Fenway.  And he saw a big, long fight in the bleachers, which is also very rare for Friendly Fenway.

--Ryan Sweeney needs to play more often.  I don't care what the numbers say, even if they say he can't hit lefties.  Play him every day until he shows you that you can't let him do that.

--In the 18-3 game, with two out, and already down by about 12 runs at the time, Jason Repko hit a screamer, low off the left field wall, about 315 feet away--and tried to stretch it into a double.  Thrown out at second by a mile, as you will be when you hit a rocket only 315 feet away that ricochets right into the glove of the outfielder.  As I'm explaining how this is lousy baseball--since a runner on first or on second, down by double digits, doesn't matter, and you can't take a chance on a baserunning out ending the inning--the Sox come up in the next inning and every single one of them swung at the first or second pitch.  The little things win pennants.

--Having said that, I'm with a friend at Fenway for the 6-3 game.  Sox have a runner at third in the second, no score yet, just one out.  I say, "Bad teams don't score this run."  They didn't score that run.

--I like Cody Ross, but I can see why he's played for about five teams in maybe seven years.  But I still like him.

--Jerry Remy is looking good in his blue suits doing the pre-game.  Not Heidi Watney good, but you know...

--Speaking of Heidi Watney, bostonherald.com reported in November that her departure was "a mutual decision," pointing out that her contract ran out at the end of last year and the Sox weren't willing to renew.  This is, of course, an outrage, as she was more popular than any of the Sox players the last couple of years.  Nick Green and even Jason Varitek, for God's sake, were said to be dating Heidi Watney, and not the other way around.  Had one of them married her, he would have been Mr. Heidi Watney.  A travesty.

--As I explained to a friend of mine--and he still disagrees--Francona made the right decision to change his mind and attend the 100th birthday thing at Fenway.  My point to my friend--who pointed out in various correct ways how the Boston management hung Francona out to dry, and were lousy to him for a long time even before the losing streak that cost him his job--was that the 100th birthday celebration was for the fans, and the fans only.  And the fans wanted to see him there.  I want to see him there.  He does, in fact, owe it to the fans to be there.  If he wants to not attend Boston management-run ads to promote the thing, that's very understandable, and I wouldn't blame him for not posing with them for pictures afterwards.  But he needs to be there.  I'm glad someone--possibly his agent, asking him, "Do this for potential managing jobs later!"--talked some sense into him.  It's why you go to the wake of a parent of an ex a year after a messy breakup.  Because it's expected of you, and correctly so.

--This team being the 100th anniversary team is the same as getting severe heartburn from the champagne you drank just a little bit of at New Years.  Your stomach hurts both times, and they both leave a nasty taste in your mouth.

--The most telling comment from that whole Bobby Valentine/Youkilis mess was Pedroia's.

--And Valentine was wrong: Youk always plays 100%.  He literally doesn't know any other way.  But his follow-up comment was dead-on: Youk's swing is different, and something is very wrong.  Still fields a golden glove, though.

--Pedroia also plays 100% all the time--and there's nothing wrong with his bat this year, either.

--I don't miss Papelbon, even after Bailey went down and they still don't really have a closer.

--Their relief pitching, however, is fine, especially with Melancon gone.  Becket made it look easy against the Rangers, too.  Really he just made that one bad pitch to Napoli.

--Lester is worrying me, as his lack of quality starts goes back to last September.

--Fenway looks beautiful, even more so than Heidi did.  Yeah, I just said that.

Luke Sewell--1933 Goudey

Photos: Luke Sewell's 1933 Goudey, front and back, from my collection

Important recent card in my collection because a) my better half bought it for me for Christmas, and b) I love Goudeys.  The 1933 set is an iconic set to begin with; it was one of the few sets since the early Cracker Jack cards, the famous T205 and T206 cards, or the ones made in triptych in the late 1800s, to be considered art.  The 1933 Goudeys are smaller than today's cards, almost square, with a painting likeness of the player (sometimes accurate, sometimes not) against a solid color background.  The likeness of the player was often outlined very sharply against this background, as Sewell's is.  The cards, individually and as a set, are of high aesthetic value: the colors hold together well; the cardboard is thick and sustains (except around the corners, notoriously for this set); the printing conditions were very high; and, most importantly, all of the major players of the day are there, including 3 or 4 Ruths and Gehrigs.  A rarity in this set is that many of the players have duplicate cards, and not always because they changed teams, retired, etc.

Family lore has it that my father probably had a ton of these when he was a kid growing up in the 40s or early 50s.  He didn't remember which ones.  One day his mother came in and cleaned up his room, which involved throwing many of them away.  He had maybe three or four left over, which he either demolished by attaching them to his bike spokes, or lost by playing betting games with them--usually by flicking them against brick walls; he who had his card land face-up took the lot.  If this is accurate, he lost some HOF players, and maybe a few grand worth of cards.  But nobody thought of collecting and making money from these things back in the day.

This card:

This one is probably in G-VG condition.  It's not professionally graded, but since I'm holding on to it forever, I'm not going to bother.  It has slight creases of wear in the upper portion, noticeable only in a slanted light, and even slighter ones in the upper left corner, beneath the name, and in the direct center.  The corners are very rounded; this is notoriously common for this set.  Someone had to have the mindset of a collector in 1933 to somehow protect the card (probably in a book, or maybe a cheese box, back then) and its corners.  (There's a set of 114 cards of this condition on ebay right now, going for just over eight grand.)  That just wasn't the case most of the time back then.  Schoolboys played with them, folded them, flipped them, put them in their bike spokes, etc.  Some kid definitely played with this one back in the day; the creases tell me that it's been flipped on its head or tail quite a bit; it's probably seen its share of walls.  That means more to me, somehow.  It's got more character, more story, behind it, then if some guy just put it between the pages of a hardcover book in 1933 and didn't often look at it.  Mine's been used and abused.  It's got patina, as a picker would say.  (Though if someone wants to give me a 1933 Goudey of any player in great condition, please feel free.)

The player:

Some interesting tidbits from his Wikipedia page: He came up fast, after just 17 minor league games, and was probably signed by the Cleveland Indians to begin with because his brother was already an infielder for them.  He was part of a righty/lefty platoon; he never hit in League Park, the home park, which had a right field fence only 290 feet from home plate.  Known for his defense, he threw out 71 runners one year, 60 another, and so on, which tells me that not only did he have a very good throwing arm--but, apparently, everyone ran, all the time, once they got to first.  (Babe Ruth famously ended a World Series by getting thrown out at second base.  The old sped-up clips show his spindly legs moving quicker than you would think, but that's not enough to convince me that he had any business stealing bases, at any time.)

His defense was so good, and maybe his handling of the pitching staff so well-respected, that he did very well in MVP voting at a time when hitters stats were comparable to the steroid era.  For example, he finished fifth in the MVP voting in 1937, and was an all-star.  The league average, batting, that year was .281, and the average OBP was .355.  That means that your average ballplayer, who nobody's ever heard of before, could be a good to decent leadoff or number-two hitter today.  (A slightly below average year for Pedroia would be .281/.355 right now.)  The #10 hitter in the league hit .331 with a .407 OBP and a .546 slugging %, with 111 runs scored, 25 homers and 110 RBIs.  Sewell, as I mentioned, finished 5th in MVP voting, way ahead of all the guys whose stats are mentioned above; Sewell had 111 hits, with 1 homerun, 61 RBIs and a .269 batting average--all very, very, very below the league average.  More than five guys finishing in the top-25 behind him had over 25 homers and 100 RBIs each.  The guys in front of him were your DiMaggios, Greenbergs and Gehrigs, with over 37 homers and 159 RBIs apiece (those were Gehrig's stats, whose numbers were lower than the guys in front of him on the MVP list).  Guys in front of him hit .371, .346, .337, .351, and .332., with RBI totals of 167, 183, 159 and 133.  Then Sewell, hitting .269, with 1 homer and 61 RBIs.

Now that's respect.  Or else, he had pictures.  I don't know.  I'm guessing respect.  He must've been some defensive catcher and handler of pitchers.  The equivalent today would've been Jason Varitek finishing #5 in the MVP voting between 2000 and 2007.  Not happenin'.  Sewell finished 9th, 12th and 15th in the MVP voting in other years.  You can find these stats at baseball-reference.com, here.  He threw out 53% of the baserunners for two straight years, and was annually in the mid- to upper-40s.  That's incredible, for any era.  For his career, he struck out just 307 times in over 6,000 plate appearances; this averages to just 30 strikeouts per 600 plate appearances, per season.  In 1933, he had 24 strikeouts in 536 plate appearances.  Of course, he walked about as often, too.  In those 536 PAs in 1933, he walked just 48 times--though this is, of course, double his strikeout total.  With his good MVP standing, I'll bet he made the most of all those outs--moving the runners along, hitting to the right side, bunting, sacrifice flies.  All that.  He still holds the American League record for most consecutive seasons as an active catcher, with 20.  This also speaks to his defensive prowess.  Something else that also does is that he caught three no-hitters from three no-name pitchers.  Varitek, who also caught three no-hitters, probably caught them from pitchers of higher caliber.

His brother, Joe Sewell, is a Hall of Fame shortstop.  As I've barely heard of him, I'll bet it's because of his defense, as well.  Let's look 'em up...Woops!  I'm wrong.  Clearly one of the better hitting shortstops of the 20s, if not the best, and his strikeout ratios are even better than his brother's, to the point of silliness.  He struck out 114 times in just over 8,300 plate appearances for his career.  (By comparison, many of the best hitters today K well over 114 times in about 600 plate appearances in just one season.)  On average, per season, he would K just 10 times in over 700 plate appearances, with 72 walks, 189 hits, 90+ RBIs, a .312 batting average and a .391 on-base percentage.  He once had 115 consecutive games between strikeouts.  He still holds the MLB record for fewest strikeouts per AB, averaging just one K per 63 at-bats for his career.

Pappa Sewell taught his boys to make contact.

Though this was a great time to be a hitter, the juiced-up ball and smaller ballparks didn't lead to Joe Sewell walking as much, getting as many hits, and K'ing so rarely.  His D was good, too.  Overlooked player by the HOF and voted in by the Veterans Committee in 1977 in one of their rare good moves.  He died in 1990, aged 91, so he saw himself inducted into the Hall, which is rare for an overlooked ballplayer from a bygone era.

In an odd coincidence, Luke Sewell (back to him; sorry for the brother sidetrack) was traded by the Washington Senators, with cash, to the St. Louis Browns for Bump Hadley--whose 1933 Goudey I had just bought at a flea market a few weeks before.  (Hadley, a pitcher, had hit him in the head and knocked him unconscious in 1934, ending his season.)  Until Christmas, Hadley's was only one of the two Goudeys I owned.  (I got his card, and Bing Miller's--both in Good condition--for $20 total at that flea market.)  Weird.  He won two awards for Manager of the Year (one in the majors, one in the minors) but never seemed content anywhere and stepped down all the time.  Just kept moving around.  (He had a .622 record over two seasons for one team as manager, but stepped down and re-signed elsewhere anyway.)  In 1944, he led the St. Louis Browns to its only World Series in its 52-year existence, losing to the St. Louis Cardinals.

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.

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?