A Tale of Two Pitchers

Shouldn’t be too hard to figure out who these guys are, but their stat lines are (interestingly) quite similar.

  • Pitcher 1: 17-10, 31G, 193IP, 179H, 56BB, 159K, 4.84ERA, 26HR, .244BAA
  • Pitcher 2: 14-10. 30G, 184IP, 173H, 68BB, 141K, 5.09ERA, 33HR, .246BAA

Offered without comment.

76 comments… add one
  • Duh. RJ and Beckett.
    One is old and busted. The other is young and… ?? Nobody really knows. Is he just not very good (NL < AL theory)? Is he a headcase? Has his curveball been surrendered to prevent blisters? Old and busted is signed for another year. Ugh. Young and ?? is signed for how many more?

    Rob (Middletown, CT) September 12, 2006, 10:21 am
  • And I suspect our feelings about #1 are about the same as your feelings about #2. Either would be a nice 4th starter/innings eater. But if you’re going to come into town and act like you’re the ace, well, then, you gotta be the ace….

    Fred Vincy YF September 12, 2006, 10:41 am
  • And I’d also rather be paying a guy 3M to put up those numbers than 15M…
    Regardless, both are big disappointments, win totals meaning very little in the big picture.

    SF September 12, 2006, 10:45 am
  • One is L and one is R. Does that matter any more?
    Shouldn’t we be comparing RJ to Javier V (fairly similiar numbers this year besides wins) and Beckett to Anibal S?
    SF, despite Sanchez early night struggles last night that you aptly pointed out, he pretty much shut down the best offense in the NL.

    Seth September 12, 2006, 10:51 am
  • I wasn’t proposing a comparison of “stiffs and those they’ve been traded for”, just putting up a comparison of two pitchers for our two respective teams who have won a decent number of games but who are both considered relatively massive disappointments.

    SF September 12, 2006, 11:00 am
  • Jeez – everyone here is so quick to judge pitcher #2 on, and I’m being very genuine when I say, his FIRST year in the AL East. It’s a tough division, that just maybe needs some getting used to at first. I’ll take number two for the next four years happily knowing what may be. Also, there isn’t a team out there, including the Yankees, that wouldn’t love to have #2 locked up for that money and time.
    Besides, even if he never turns into what all of us think he will, it’s still a better contract than, say, Pavano, Wright, Brown, Vazquez, Contreras, and #1. Every team makes mistakes, it’s just that most don’t run to the tune of +10mill/year, and we don’t even know if it’s a mistake yet. Why not reserve judgement until we see what happens?

    Brad September 12, 2006, 11:23 am
  • by the way, I don’t believe Josh Beckett is a stiff.

    SF September 12, 2006, 11:24 am
  • Brad is missing Clement from his little list there…

    yankeemonkey September 12, 2006, 11:28 am
  • Thankfully the Yanks will be free of Wright next year, and RJ the year after that. Though RJ in ’07 could be really bad.
    As for projecting Beckett’s future… it’s impossible to say, of course, whether or not he’ll improve. He could bust out of the AL East completely ala Vasquez. He could improve and be worth every penny. We shall see.

    Rob (Middletown, CT) September 12, 2006, 11:34 am
  • Is it a foregone conclusion that Wright will be gone? The difference in his salary and his buyout is 3M. He’s guaranteed at least the buyout. Not that the Yanks can’t swallow it, but I’m guessing the decision on whether he’s going to be gone hasn’t been made yet. Could easily be wrong, however.

    Quo September 12, 2006, 11:41 am
  • I did miss Clement, not intentionally. Also, FWIW if the Yanks don’t go get one of the larger FA hurlers this off season (what are the odds of that happening?), my guess is that Wright stays in the Bronx for the life of his contract. But, if the Yanks give large amounts of money and time to Zito, Schmidt, and whomever else is on earth that’s available, I’ll assume Wright is the odd man out. Who says they don’t buy out Johnson’s contract if he spits the bit month in round one? Does anyone think that they are going to pick up Moose for his last year?

    Brad September 12, 2006, 11:55 am
  • “Regardless, both are big disappointments”
    Pitcher 1: 17-10, 31G, 193IP, 179H, 56BB, 159K, 4.84ERA, 26HR, .244BAA
    How many 43 yr olds put up these kind of numbers? I’m not disappointed – never expected him to be the RJ of 5 yrs ago.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 12:05 pm
  • I think Moose will be back. CV is that they will decline his option and work out a more reasonable 2 year deal. The key is how reasonable…

    Rob (Middletown, CT) September 12, 2006, 12:20 pm
  • A hypothetical question:
    You are the AL manager facing the METS (!??#$#!) in game 7 of the WS. You have your choice of these two pitchers to start the game. Who gets the nod? Why?

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 12:39 pm
  • I alternate them. First Randy goes, with Beckett playing in left field. Next inning, they swap spots. That should keep the Mets guessing…

    SF September 12, 2006, 12:52 pm
  • Clearly Beckett. Not because he would automatically be better, but because RJ got lit up in both his starts against the Mets this season. Beckett allowed 0 ER in 0 IP against them.

    Quo September 12, 2006, 12:55 pm
  • Yeah, RJ has been smacked around by the Mets. At that point, I might start Lidle, Wright.. Karstens.. Rasner…
    Kidding, kidding. ;)

    Rob (Middletown, CT) September 12, 2006, 1:09 pm
  • I agree with Andrews. I don’t think anyone expected RJ to come to the AL and pitch like he did in the NL West.
    Also, I think SF’s scale of economics is a little warped, especially given the stark difference in the big picture between the two teams. Without getting into a deep payroll argument and employing endless clichés, suffice it to say that a dollar in NYC isn’t the same as a dollar in Boston.
    And relative to the overall payroll picture, the Yankees have certainly gotten a bigger bang for their buck than the Red Sox. The Sox have the second highest payroll in MLB @ $120 mil and are eliminated from post season contention by 9/1/06 while the Yanks have by far and away the highest payroll, along with the best record in the AL.
    What that basically means is that every team in the playoff hunt in both leagues, aside from the Yankees, has spent less to be there than the Red Sox have spent to watch October baseball on TV.
    Also, if I’m not mistaken, the Sox have the highest ticket prices in MLB to boot.
    Here’s to Lucky and Theo!

    lp September 12, 2006, 1:17 pm
  • I think the Mets are going to slap the ball around no matter who’s pitching to them. That’s a tough lineup. But, nothing in the world would be better than seeing the Mets get put out and the Phillies making it. I’m rooting hard for the Phillies to just go on a tear.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 1:18 pm
  • You can’t go to the playoffs when half the starting position players are on the DL for at the same time, LP>

    Brad September 12, 2006, 1:20 pm
  • Brad, the injury excuse is as tired and unoriginal as “Yankees Suck”. If Yankees fans pushed that cowardly button over the past two seasons, we would be laughed off this site.
    Wait, the Yankees won the AL East last season and will this year too. No excuses necessary!

    lp September 12, 2006, 1:40 pm
  • “First Randy goes, with Beckett playing in left field. Next inning, they swap spots.”
    SF, What are YOU drinking? I think I’ll order 2 of them.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 2:12 pm
  • Sorry, lp, how was the playoff picture relevant to this discussion, again?
    Why would no one expect Johnson to pitch well in the AL? I expect he’ll have a Mariners cap on his HOF placque.
    Seems to me the Yankees will be going to the playoffs in spite of Johnson, not because of him. In that case, then, the Yankees still have a problem in that they paid for Randy Johnson and got Josh Beckett. At least the Sox paid much less and still got Josh Beckett…

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 2:16 pm
  • You’re right, LP. I don’t know what I was thinking when I said it. Injuries had absolutely nothing to do with the Sox falling so fast this year. It’s all due to the Yankees absolutely punishing everyone this month while the first team Sox just gave up and quit on the year.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 2:22 pm
  • And to be sure, there is nothing cowardly about saying that a team has been too hurt to make the playoffs both in the field and in the starting rotation. It is however quite cowardly to imply that I’m making excuses from the comfort of your desk, and try your best to convince the world that the Sox slide has nothing to do with injuries.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 2:29 pm
  • I think it’s quite a stretch to say that a team is going to the playoffs in spite of a #3 starter who will probably end up with 18 or 19 wins. Explain, please.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 2:43 pm
  • Wins are by far the most misleading of statistics. I’d guess Johnson deserves perhaps 12 of his 17 wins, maybe a couple more. Let’s say he only got three wins he didn’t deserve, in which case he’s 14-13, an inconsistent mark for sure, especially considering Johnson was supposed to be the Yanks’ No. 1 or No. 2 pitcher.
    So a No. 1/2 pitcher with a .500 record, an ERA near 5, and a habit of needing six innings of bullpen help every other start? That’s not a help to a team pushing to make the playoffs. And it’s certainly not what the Yankees paid for — it’s not even close.

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 2:48 pm
  • Or, you can look at RJ’s last year in Arizona and make the argument that he was the best hurler in the game with a terrible record. Wins mean nothing.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 2:49 pm
  • LP: I’m with Brad on this one. The Sox have been devastated by injuries, and this explains their current predicament. An arguement can be made that they exacerbated their problems by not adequately preparing for injury at the beginning of the year, and, especially, not finding help at the deadline, but these are different issues. There was a time when it looked like the Yankees season would be destroyed this year due to injury. Through good fortune and the effective use of team resources, the Yanks have avoided that fate, but that this would be the case was hardly a foregone conclusion in, say, July.

    YF September 12, 2006, 2:54 pm
  • Johnson does not need 6 inn of bullpen help every other start, please.
    I don’t think the FO really thought they were getting a pitcher who would dominate at 42, 43 the way he did at 35. He has been inconsistent, for sure, but for the most part, has pitched quite well the second half of the season. The Yanks don’t want their money back.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 3:05 pm
  • Paul,
    The post-season is always relevant to a discussion because the ultimate objective is to win a championship, not to have the lowest payroll or even exhibit the most value vis-à-vis money to stats (an erroneous equation anyway).
    Moreover, when you’re talking money, there is a significant added financial benefit for teams that make the post-season compared to those that are out of it before Sept. You can’t have a money discussion without factoring that into the equation.
    Relative to your AL vs NL point: You have to be the only person on this planet to expect RJ to pick up where he left off when he parted ways with the Ms. That is ridiculous. If Clemens came back to the AL East in his 40s, would you expect him to post a sub 2.00 ERA?
    Brad & YF The Yanks had significant injuries over the past two seasons and still made the post-season – namely because they had farm talent like Wang, Cabrera, and Cano. That wasn’t just luck. The Sox, just like the Yankees, made their choices and have to live with the consequences. Using injuries as an excuse when injuries are a risk for every team and athlete in every sport since the beginning of professional sports (and always will be) is cowardly.
    And while we’re on the money tip, some questions for Red Sox fans who buy into SF’s and Paul’s point regarding value:
    Why should I, as a Yankee fan, care how much more RJ is paid over Beckett, or how much more our payroll is than the second highest payroll?
    Do I pay more for a ticket, on average? NO
    Do I pay more for YES than RSN pays for NESN? NO – YES is free.
    Do I get to watch my team in the postseason as opposed to moving on to football? YES
    How is my NYY experience less than the RSN baseball experience due to the difference in the teams’ respective payrolls?
    My ultimate point is that there are many fans in MLB that can make a payroll argument against the Yankees. RSN cannot. The Sox are no longer the small market payroll that couldn’t.
    And injuries aside, the Sox still blew $120 mil for a season of pure hype and no substance.
    1 New York Yankees $194,663,079
    2 Boston Red Sox $120,099,824
    3 Los Angeles Angels $103,472,000
    4 Chicago White Sox $102,750,667
    5 New York Mets $101,084,963
    6 Los Angeles Dodgers $98,447,187
    7 Chicago Cubs $94,424,499
    What’s interesting about this is that the Sox are the only city outside of the three major markets on this list. Someone’s spending money they don’t have.

    lp September 12, 2006, 3:10 pm
  • lp, It sounded like you were making a version of the “pitchers struggle when transitioning from the NL to the AL” argument. Since Johnson had a lot of success in the AL, I was saying I don’t think that argument flies.
    The Yankees did not get Carlod Beltran, IIRC, because they could not afford him. New York has a limit, and they are at it. So paying Randy Johnson that much money to do that little does indeed hurt the team because they could get much more value for that money. Obviously, the team is still going to the playoffs, as I said, in spite of Johnson.
    On a straight position-by-position comparison, if the Yankees lost Giambi (DH), Matsui (LF), Sheffield (RF), Damon (CF), Jeter (SS), Cabrera (backup OF), Wang (No 3 pitcher), Wright (No 4 pitcher), Ponson (No. 5 pitcher) and Rivera (CL) for significant amounts of time (at least 10 games) — and many of them at the same time — and still made the playoffs, then you could say the Yanks have survived through injuries similar to those suffered by the Red Sox. The Sox’ rash of injuries is unprecedented in my memory of following baseball, and considering the Sox only would have needed to maintain a pace of five games over .500 or so to keep pace with New York, it’s clear injuries were the bulk of the reason the team faltered. There were other reasons, sure — we’ve discussed them all at length here. But it is equally lazy to dismiss the Sox’ injuries as it is to use them as an excuse.

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 3:24 pm
  • LP – the operative word on your blabber of nothing is “risk”. This you are right about: all teams deal with injury risk; not many teams have had to endure what the Sox have had to. It wasn’t a risk, but a reality in the case of the Sox.
    Let me ask you this – where would the Yankees had gone had they lost Posada and a 15 game winner from the battery for a few months?
    Again, the only thing cowardly in this whole discussion is the act of you calling it that. Injuries tear a team apart (have you ever actually played a sport?????), and when you have so many so fast and all together, it’s a mountain that can’t be climbed. Do you honestly think that if the Sox had endured what they did in May the result would be what it is now?

    Brad September 12, 2006, 3:29 pm
  • Oh, forgot Posada/Varitek in that litany of the wounded…

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 3:30 pm
  • the Sox still blew $120 mil for a season of pure hype and no substance
    No, they didn’t. They likely didn’t “blow 120 mil”. They likely turned a nice profit. They only “blew it” for the fans who expected them to win everything again. And even that’s a relative charge: they may have NOT blown it by not panicking at the deadline, trading youth, in the hopes of scraping in the playoffs only to be dismissed quickly. Saying the Sox “blew” their money is quite limited in meaning.
    What’s interesting about this is that the Sox are the only city outside of the three major markets on this list. Someone’s spending money they don’t have.
    I have no idea what this means. Have you seen their books? Can you help me out here?
    As for the whole Beckett vs. Johnson “value” debate, I think it’s certainly legit, though it wasn’t what I was getting at in my original post (which was offered without comment). Beckett currently makes 1/40th (or 2.5%) of the Sox’ payroll. Johnson makes 1/12th (8.5%) of the Yankees’. Next year Beckett will be making that same 8.5%. We have learned this year that each team, like it or not, has something of a self-imposed salary cap. So within their own systems, deriving performance commensurate with salary is still important. Right now Beckett is contributing more to the Sox based on his salary than Johnson is to the Yankees (this isn’t saying a whole lot, though, don’t get me wrong). Next year that may not be the case, though, and that will hurt the Sox even more than it has this year.

    SF September 12, 2006, 3:31 pm
  • SF’s point leads to the second half of the Johnson-Beckett debate — who has better chance for improvement?
    I think the chances are greater, even likely, that Beckett is a productive pitcher who helps his team next year. I think Johnson also will improve, just because this year has been such an aberration from the norm for him, but at this age, how much Johnson can go up is significantly limited. For Beckett, the old saying about skies and limits still holds true — at least for now.

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 3:40 pm
  • …RJ has been a disappointment this year, especially early on…even some of his wins were because the bats came to his rescue….if he can turn in a couple of gems in the playoffs, then he’s worth every penny…

    dc September 12, 2006, 3:53 pm
  • The interesting thing about RJ and Beckett’s stats is that age is basically the explanation for both of them; what’s different is how their respective ages slant our views towards them. Both have mixed brilliant, dominating outings with nightmarish ones all year. For RJ, it’s considered proof that he’s too old to be the pitcher he once was all the time. For Beckett, it’s generally taken as a sign of promise not yet fully realized. Are both views essentially correct, or are they a product of media and cultural bias?

    mouse September 12, 2006, 3:54 pm
  • Sorry to get all social commentary there–just couldn’t resist. :)

    mouse September 12, 2006, 4:07 pm
  • My broader point SF is that why should a Yankee fan care about value or payroll relative to the Red Sox? You have yet to answer that.
    The difference in salaries does not filter down to a financial difference as far as fans and our experiences are concerned. In fact, you clearly pay more to root for a loser. The only reason you bring it up now is because you have nothing else. Very typical Yankee-hater tactic around this time of year.
    If the Yankees missed the playoffs, then the minutiae of how they spend their dollars would be appropriate. But they have the best record in the AL.

    lp September 12, 2006, 4:11 pm
  • Am I missing something. What are the injuries the red sox had to deal with before getting swept by the yankees?
    Paul you have a long list of yankees who would need to get injured on your “position-by-position comparision” How is that comparison valid? Why are Giambi, Rivera and Jeter even mentioned on this list?
    Sheff and Matsui played in combined 60 games. Trot and Varitek will play in close to 200 combined. I agree the sox got hurt more in the pitching injury dept, but the yanks have not had Pavano or Sturtze.
    Injuries are a lame excuse for an underachiving team. Young players should step up or FO should get the team the help it needs. Willy Mo seemed to step up somewhat. I for one would not mind if Wright and Ponson got hurt and that meant calling up Hughes, Clippard and JB Cox.
    Damon has also been playing this season with a hurt foot, to boot. Also it should be mentioned that this is where Ortiz not playing the field really hurts, as I am sure Trot/Tek/Manny would like the occasional dh day, but that is not a knock against him because the dh spot is a position.

    Seth September 12, 2006, 4:12 pm
  • I suppose all this talk is premature — the goal is not to finish the season with the best record in the AL. If the Yanks don’t win the World Series, then in the end, they will have paid even more than the Red Sox for a season in which they cannot raise a pennant.

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 4:14 pm
  • Giambi I listed as DH, and Ortiz missed 10 games at DH.
    Rivera is the closer. Papelbon likely is out the rest of the season.
    Jeter is the shortstop. Gonzalez was DLed.
    I listed it that way because it was easy for me to do, and I’m at work. Those are the positions the Sox’ injuries played, and if the Yanks’ position players at those ppositions were injured the same length of time, I suspect you would not be so dismissive of injuries, Seth.
    You do mention that Pena stepped up — except that after so doing, he was injured too.

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 4:17 pm
  • Let’s see if Beckett will be going for 20 wins in his early 40’s. 3 more starts for Johnson to try to win 20.

    Jonah Falcon September 12, 2006, 4:27 pm
  • PS. Last year, Johnson led the Yanks in wins, innings pitched, ERA and strikeouts.
    And he was 41/42 years old.

    Jonah Falcon September 12, 2006, 4:29 pm
  • Ortiz 133 games, Giambi 127
    Paplebon and Rivera both 59
    Slighty off topic, but can anyone please give some background on the Paplebon injury? Is he out for the season because it is serious or are they being protective for a young guy?

    Seth September 12, 2006, 4:30 pm
  • Wow, Seth is another one who refuses to admit that the Sox were hurt by injuries to the point of no recover.
    And, as far as Pavano is concerned:
    You can’t very well lose what was never, ever, ever there.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:34 pm
  • ugh…here we go again…seems that once baseball season is over [usually in sept. for the sox], SF’s grab their bowl of sour grapes and pray to the soxgods to make the yankees lose so their season of misery is complete….geez…

    Anonymous September 12, 2006, 4:34 pm
  • He has some strained ligaments in his shoulder, and can’t pitch. No tear in the RC, but some very strained parts. Not that it matters, it’s just another excuse for all the Red Sox fans, right? Bums, they are.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:35 pm
  • last post was me

    dc September 12, 2006, 4:35 pm
  • …one theory is that pap was overused…any opinions on that?

    dc September 12, 2006, 4:36 pm
  • Sour Grapes indeed. Tell me, were you rooting for Boston to win the series?

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:37 pm
  • where did that theory come from, DC? You?

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:38 pm
  • Please attach the link so I can read that overused story on Papelbon.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:39 pm
  • and pray to the soxgods to make the yankees lose
    LP: we do this always. It is not dependent on the Sox’ success or failure to be true. This isn’t very hard to fathom – why do some YFs act so surprised that we are this way?

    SF September 12, 2006, 4:40 pm
  • “SF’s point leads to the second half of the Johnson-Beckett debate — who has better chance for improvement?”
    C’mon, RJ will not improve as he approaches 44. I would gladly settle for another year like this one, but I doubt that we’ll get it.
    Beckett may get better – no doubt he has the potential, but I just don’t ever see him being a #1 starter.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 4:44 pm
  • “Tell me, were you rooting for Boston to win the series?”
    Brad, the fact that the word “the” isn’t followed by a year speaks volumes. Sorry, dude.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 4:48 pm
  • …lighten up brad….can’t say where I heard the overused theory…just that his injury is consistent with “dead arm”…typical of pitchers who have worn down….does it matter where I heard it.

    dc September 12, 2006, 4:49 pm
  • Brad, this injury excuse seems pretty lame, and sorry if yanks fans don’t sympathize or buy it. The Yanks lost Gary Sheffield and Hideki Matsui for most of the year and all we heard from sox posters here was how little these guys meant to the team. Paul put up a post about how little these injuries were affecting the team’s offense. He did this early in their injuries, relying on small sample size. The thing was that the Yanks got a decent performance out of Melky Cabrera who several Sox posters (not all of them, mind you) disrespected as a prospect. Pavano again was available for the year; Mussina’s spent time nicked up; Randy Johnson has aged quickly. But Chien-Ming Wang, a player you, Brad, undervalued as a prospect, stepped up. He stepped up bigger than the $10 million blister king, or headcase Matt Clement. The difference between the Sox and Yanks this year was that a lot more previously marginal players stepped up. The Sox got hurt and the players who filled in (Javy Lopez, I miss you already) just plain sucked. Going into this season, certain Sox fans here talked about how better designed Boston was. It wasn’t. Injuries are a fact of life in the majors and the Boston franchise was sadly not up to the task of dealing with this inevitability.

    Nick-YF September 12, 2006, 4:52 pm
  • “Wow, Seth is another one who refuses to admit that the Sox were hurt by injuries to the point of no recover. ”
    I have no problem admitting that the sox were hurt by injuries, but to the point of no recover? You must me joking. If they don’t get swept by the yanks we are not even talking about injuries right now. My point is that the injury excuse is an excuse of convenience. And I do not believe the sox injuries were any more significant than injuries to the yanks or twins or oakland, and the list could go on (facts seem to back this up as far as games played by ‘key’ hitters goes as well).
    And I will never use, well we did not have Pavano as an excuse, it was merely for comparison purposes of injured players.
    For the ‘cheap knock’ I will go with maybe some players can stay in better shape to avoid injury.

    Seth September 12, 2006, 4:56 pm
  • I actually thought you read it somewhere, so I wanted to read it as well, that’s all.
    Speaks volumes to exactly what, Andrews? Please enlighten me as to what I spoke volumes to, and why? And, while we are on it, why don’t you see Beckett as a number one starter? Based on this year? His lackluster ability? His age? His mediocre stuff? His beard? Or, is it his uniform?
    Also, I’m not your dude. I don’t pretend to be, so don’t assume that I am.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:56 pm
  • So, Seth : If the Yankees had endured what the Red Sox did, when the Red Sox did – all would be okay now, right? You do realize that Julian Tavarez has started four games in the last month, and that Mark Loretta had to play first base for a week.
    It didn’t happen in June or May, it happened in August, and it happened hard and fast. There is no recover this late in the year, and you know it. Take off the blinders for just one minute, guy. It’s funny how the only people on earth who can’t see that it’s not an excuse are Yankee fans.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 4:59 pm
  • Brad, two words to understand why you’re not going to get sympathy from a yanks fan:
    Sidney Ponson

    Nick-YF September 12, 2006, 5:01 pm
  • Nick, FWIW I STILL underestimate Wang. Anyone who can’t get a strikeout when he needs one, is bound to get into trouble when it matters. He’s been great, but to me it’s the same as the 20 win Derek Lowe season. A fluke – when all the balls were hit to all the infielders and none hardly ever found holes. I’ve always said it about DL and I’ll continue to say it about Wang.
    Also, you know as well as I do your post is garbage. The Yankees actually had ALL YEAR to deal with the injuries, how long did the Sox have?

    Brad September 12, 2006, 5:05 pm
  • Trust me, the last thing I want is sympathy. I think the Red Sox dropped the ball on this year, and I made it overtly evident on this site when the trades went down, but to assume that this team is as bad as August showed us and not even consider the injury plauge, is well, Yankee like.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 5:06 pm
  • I’m out. Later boys.

    Brad September 12, 2006, 5:08 pm
  • I meant dude in the universal sense.
    As far as the Beckett issue, I’ve read the stats, so forgive me if I don’t bore everyone by repeating them. My opinion is based on that and what I’ve observed from him since 2003 – just not ready to buy into the hype.
    BTW, he looks better to me in a Red Sox uniform.

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 5:38 pm
  • Brad
    The sox started using Taverez as a starter after they traded Wells. Why trade Wells?
    Also take a look at the SP for the sox’s 4 wins of the month, Taverez (2), Gabbard, Snyder. Seems like the “replacements” are actually keeping the wins coming.
    Also Rivera has not pitched in sept and Yanks are 7-3. Paplebon pitched only once in Sept and sox are 4-4 for the month.

    Seth September 12, 2006, 5:50 pm
  • I don’t understand why saying the Sox have been decimated by injuries is such a crime. They have been. There are lots of reasons why this has mattered this season. It’s not whining to point this out. If the front office is as ignorant of how injuries have affected this Sox team as many of the YFs posting at this site are than we SFs are in real trouble. I think that it’s vital that the FO acknowledge the risks involved in going into seasons with certain types of players, and that they re-manufacture a team that is less vulnerable to what they have gone through. However, and on the other hand, sometimes you can’t disaster plan for a 150 year storm; planning for a 100 year storm is usually the limit of contingency.

    SF September 12, 2006, 5:57 pm
  • SF,
    Are you equating Theo’s handling of the sox with W’s handling of the Hurricane Katrina disaster??

    Andrews September 12, 2006, 6:07 pm
  • The only difference being that W had plenty of knowledge that Katrina was coming. I’ll grant — have granted, will continue to grant — Nick’s point that you need to have a team that can support the risk of injury.
    But the risk of simultaneous injuries to five of your nine starters and three of five starting pitchers? That seems a bit silly.
    Luck has a lot to do with it, of course. The Yanks got great performances from players who had no business doing so (Aaron Guiel even got a game-winning hit, I think), while the Sox’ emergency replacements underperformed even their meager expectations (Javy Lopez, Eric Hinske).
    Don’t talk to me about Sidney Ponson unless you’d rather have a team that starts Kason Gabbard four times, Kyle Snyder close to 10 times, Julian Tavarez four times, David Pauley twice, Abe Alvarez once and Jason Johnson four or five times. The fact that three of these pitchers have finally won games simply means that the law of averages applied at the right time for them…

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 6:20 pm
  • Speaking of injuries, it looks like Hideki Matsui is in the starting lineup tonight. I only wish that I could care.

    Paul SF September 12, 2006, 6:22 pm
  • “Also, you know as well as I do your post is garbage. The Yankees actually had ALL YEAR to deal with the injuries, how long did the Sox have?”
    If you say the yankees had all year to deal with injuries, how about the sox have all year to get a big lead?
    they could have took the time to get a giant lead like 9 games and then after the injuries come, then they start falling to a lead of 1-3 games.
    so before you start complaining about when the sox gets the injuries, talk about that the sox had all year to eliminate the yankees from playoff contention
    the yankees could have easily become mincemeat but the sox just didn’t do much and just held a soft lead that could have been taken away. (and has)

    yankeeboy September 12, 2006, 6:57 pm
  • Here’s an idea. Let’s stop throwing around baseless assertions and actually collect some data. Is anyone here willing to go through the Sox and Yanks rosters for the season, and see exactly how many games every player has missed per injury. Multiply each player’s games missed by his VORP or WS score, and then add up the values for each team. It might not be perfect, but it should give us some basic idea of exactly what each team lost in terms of actual production.
    Unfortunately, I’m kinda busy…..

    YF September 12, 2006, 6:58 pm
  • One thing said above really irked me. Why trade David Wells? Was this a serious question? Trade a guy back to the place he lives that is in a playoff race? Trade a guy who has publicly requested a trade once and never made it into a dramafest? Trade a guy who wanted to leave and have another shot at postseason glory? Trade him for one of the most highly-regarded catching prospects in the game today? Seriously. A lot of points brought up by YFs were valid, but this one was not. The FO admitted their season was done, and tried to turn a slight positive this year (Wells’ return from knee injuries) into a bigger (potential)positive for many years to come (George Kottaras). Of all the deals the Red Sox made this year, that was the one that made the most sense.

    Quo September 12, 2006, 7:27 pm
  • YF:
    I smell a job for…Paul, Nick, or Gerb!!!

    SF September 12, 2006, 7:40 pm

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.