Besides 2004, what is your favorite Red Sox memory?

[rjortiz]

I'm ignoring those other numbers because they happened in the NL Central, not the AL East. His AL sample is as a pitcher who wasn't awful and made his daily bread on his durability. Other good recent examples include men like Jeremy Guthrie, Ryan Dempster, and Derek Lowe. The kind of guys you see somewhere between the 3 and 5 spots in a good rotation, but if he's starting the first or second game of your playoff series, your playoff run is going to be short.

 

Arroyo was in no way, shape, form or means, a #2-3 starter for the Boston Red Sox. And if at any point he ever was, that would be a sign, in flashing red letters, that it was time to upgrade the rotation immediately if not sooner.

 

 

 

 

... and? It's not like we're the only team for which that is true. For the so-called worst moment of Theo's run, something that doesn't even hurt us particualrly badly is pretty weak sauce.

 

And for the record, I'd definitely rate the Rent-a-wreck debacle as far worse for the Red Sox than the Arroyo trade without needing a lot of time to think it over. THAT one hurt. THAT was the one where we couldn't simply buy a replacement, because there's just not a good shortstop on the market every year. Corner outfielders come and go. And I'm sure that was part of Theo's risk assessment, along with an honest appraisal of Arroyo's actual value as a starter. Wily Mo was high risk high reward and he didn't pay out, but Arroyos aren't hard to find on the market if your scouting is good, and ours has been more hit than miss over the years.

 

Nor is it unfair to mention that Theo did a decent job picking those replacements. Drew did fine for us, and Daisuke was excellent before what I'm still 100% convinced is a major shoulder injury that happened in the second half of the 2007 season that was covered up for much too long and as a result never healed properly. Daisuke went overnight from a guy who, sure, lived on the edge of the strike zone, but could paint and throw called strikes to keep hitters off balance -- from that, to a guy who was walking 4+ guys per nine. That to me reeks of injury.

 

 

 

 

It was a bad trade. But why, 8 years later, is "a bad trade" such a focal point? There have been other bad trades. No sane person actually thinks that Bronson Arroyo actually puts up a WAR of nearly 7 if he stays in the American League east in 2006 do they?

 

Do they?

 

Because if he doesn't have that year, there is literally nothing separating Arroyo from Jeremy Guthrie. Heck as is Guthrie has an all but exactly identital career ERA+ at 103. Is Guthrie a 2-3? Because quite honestly given that most of Guthrie's experience is in the AL East in a hitter friendly park in Baltimore facing both us and NYY 19 times a year each and frequently with laughably bad defense behind him, I'd rate him just a tick higher than Arroyo personally.

 

1) Overstating/understating

2) False equivalency

3) Off-topic

4) Focusing on a component instead of the overall package

5) Cherry-picking

6) Not understanding the terms they are criticizing

 

You keep making these six mistakes in your posts. Until you fix these, I see no point responding.

[Dojji]

In all fairness, it is the offseason haha.

 

I used to hold the Beckett trade in high regard, but the more I look at the money spent, prospect cost, and his numbers, I question it. He had three seasons in the 5.00+ ERA range with the Red Sox. The Red Sox had such a strong core of players in those years that I seriously wonder if maybe the team would have done better without him.

 

Mike Lowell's run with Boston is what tips the scales for me. Beckett and Lowell combined for a huge impact in 07. Lowell was re-signed for too long but his significance to the team in 06 and 07 is not to be underestimated.

[Dojji]

1) Overstating/understating

2) False equivalency

3) Off-topic

4) Focusing on a component instead of the overall package

5) Cherry-picking

6) Not understanding the terms they are criticizing

 

You keep making these six mistakes in your posts. Until you fix these, I see no point responding.

 

By all means, weasel out of the argument you started. Bye!

 

I mean what, I'm supposed to care? You called me out dude, not the other way around.

[rjortiz]

By all means, weasel out of the argument you started. Bye!

 

I mean what, I'm supposed to care? You called me out dude, not the other way around.

 

Why would I want to discuss a topic with someone who doesn't understand what they are talking about?

[Jaddy]

why you gotta be a jerk about it??? I'm talking to you seabeachfred!!!

[Palodios]

The team might have done better overall, but they might also have one less championship.

 

Also, with regard to Hanley and Sanchez, those two have had their ups and downs. And Sanchez, now that he has developed into a solid starter, is making a ton of money too. There are a lot of permutations and combinations.

 

 

The Red Sox had a team stocked full of talent for so many years. Manny and Papi were a huge force in the lineup for the better part of a decade. Youkilis, Pedroia, Ellsbury, Lester, Varitek, some Schilling. Papelbon, even Bard and Okajima etc etc. If they added a different top starter, I think they very well could have had even more success in the postseason.

 

Josh Beckett started three games in the 2008 playoffs and had an ERA in the 8.50's throughout. If they replaced him with some 5.50 ERA loser they may have very well made the World Series that year.

[Bellhorn04]

Josh Beckett started three games in the 2008 playoffs and had an ERA in the 8.50's throughout. If they replaced him with some 5.50 ERA loser they may have very well made the World Series that year.

 

Jeez Pal you love this stuff don't you?

 

Beckett was 1-0 in that '08 ALCS. Lester was 0-2.

[a700hitter]

Josh Beckett and his princess and the pea routine cost us the division championship in 2008 and very possibly another World Championship.

[a700hitter]

Not having Pedro in 2005 may have cost us a back to back championship. We had a beast of an offensive team that season. I'm not complaining with 3 championships in 10 seasons, but I do think that Pedro would have done a better job in the playoffs than Matt Cement Head Clement. Let's not forget that we played a s*** ton of money for that piece of garbage.

[rjortiz]

Not having Pedro in 2005 may have cost us a back to back championship. We had a beast of an offensive team that season. I'm not complaining with 3 championships in 10 seasons, but I do think that Pedro would have done a better job in the playoffs than Matt Cement Head Clement. Let's not forget that we played a s*** ton of money for that piece of garbage.

 

Very possible. He definitely would have made us AL East champions.

[Dojji]

Not having Pedro in 2005 may have cost us a back to back championship. We had a beast of an offensive team that season.

 

2005 was Pedro's last good year, and to get him in 2005 we'd have had to pay him through the life of his Mets contract. And our rotation in 05 was outright bad, one Pedro more or less wasn't going to fix it or save us in the postseason. If the White Sox hadn't handed us our butts in the first round like they actually did, we still weren't getting anywhere with that rotation, even that rotation with Pedro instead of, say, Wade Miller.

 

We knew we were giving up a couple final decent yeas from Pedro, but Theo was still right to move on. Even if it set us up for a couple rocky seasons as the rotation rebuilt it was still the right thing to do to set the team up going forward.

[Bellhorn04]

2005 was Pedro's last good year, and to get him in 2005 we'd have had to pay him through the life of his Mets contract. And our rotation in 05 was outright bad, one Pedro more or less wasn't going to fix it or save us in the postseason. If the White Sox hadn't handed us our butts in the first round like they actually did, we still weren't getting anywhere with that rotation, even that rotation with Pedro instead of, say, Wade Miller.

 

We knew we were giving up a couple final decent yeas from Pedro, but Theo was still right to move on. Even if it set us up for a couple rocky seasons as the rotation rebuilt it was still the right thing to do to set the team up going forward.

 

Agreed.

[Palodios]

Jeez Pal you love this stuff don't you?

 

Beckett was 1-0 in that '08 ALCS. Lester was 0-2.

 

Lester absolutely spanked the Angels in the series prior. You can't blame a guy who went 0-2 in games where his teams scored 1 run, and 1 run.

[Dojji]

Let's not forget that Beckett had a strained lat in the 2008 championship series. he was pitching through some pretty serious pain. He'd have other situations whre he simply donked out and did nothing useful, but 2008 in particular was not his fault.

[Palodios]

Let's not forget that Beckett had a strained lat in the 2008 championship series. he was pitching through some pretty serious pain. He'd have other situations whre he simply donked out and did nothing useful, but 2008 in particular was not his fault.

 

So if he got hurt during the ALCS, why did he suck so much in the ALDS?

[Bellhorn04]

So if he got hurt during the ALCS, why did he suck so much in the ALDS?

 

The injury didn't occur in the ALCS.

[Bellhorn04]

Lester absolutely spanked the Angels in the series prior. You can't blame a guy who went 0-2 in games where his teams scored 1 run, and 1 run.

 

Lester pitched one good game and one terrible game in the ALCS. Beckett pitched one good game and one terrible game. Dice-K pitched one good game and one terrible game. Wakefield pitched one terrible game.

[Palodios]

Lester pitched one good game and one terrible game in the ALCS. Beckett pitched one good game and one terrible game. Dice-K pitched one good game and one terrible game. Wakefield pitched one terrible game.

 

 

Lester's terrible game was pitching 5 innings of 4 ER ball.

Beckett's terrible game was pitching 4.1 innings of 8 ER ball.

 

4 ER is rough, but 8 ER makes a game unwinnable.

[Bellhorn04]

Tito made the worst mistake of his career not taking Beckett out of Game 2.

[a700hitter]

2005 was Pedro's last good year, and to get him in 2005 we'd have had to pay him through the life of his Mets contract. And our rotation in 05 was outright bad, one Pedro more or less wasn't going to fix it or save us in the postseason. If the White Sox hadn't handed us our butts in the first round like they actually did, we still weren't getting anywhere with that rotation, even that rotation with Pedro instead of, say, Wade Miller.

 

We knew we were giving up a couple final decent yeas from Pedro, but Theo was still right to move on. Even if it set us up for a couple rocky seasons as the rotation rebuilt it was still the right thing to do to set the team up going forward.

I didn't say that it wasn't the right business move. I am just saying that Pedro on the 2005 team could have brought another championship. I still believe that.

[a700hitter]

Let's not forget that Beckett had a strained lat in the 2008 championship series. he was pitching through some pretty serious pain. He'd have other situations whre he simply donked out and did nothing useful, but 2008 in particular was not his fault.

IMO Beckett strained his lat because he was not in game shape from being shut down for about a month due to his princess and the pea act. That's my opinion. His absence for the 3 weeks or a month also cost us the division title IMO. We finished 2 games behind the rays.

[mvp 78]

I don't think it was a princess pea act. I think he was just too lazy to ever really stay in shape. He won a WS as a rookie, got paid, won a second WS and the just stopped giving a s***.

[SoxSport]

I didn't say that it wasn't the right business move. I am just saying that Pedro on the 2005 team could have brought another championship. I still believe that.

 

The Mets have made two reckless moves in recent times, taking two FAs Pedro and Bay, away from the Red Sox by overpaying, with negative consequences. That's how teams get bad--by overvaluing players. The Yankees are going through that right now--all their excessive contracts have caught up to them. With no prospects, they had no choice but to get more--and now they are in deeper.

 

Who knows what Pedro and Bay would have done the next year in Boston? Pedro might have been slightly worse staying in the AL than he was with the Mets his first year. The rest of his contract was a writeoff. Bay might have had another good year at Fenway. he might not have gotten a concussion, etc. You don't know. But one thing you know: the Red Sox stuck to their guns about contracts, and weren't going to go long term with either player. This year, they stuck to their guns about Ellsbury. The Yankees had to way overbid for him to get him. He isn't a $22M player. In fact, most of the better players in baseball aren't making even $20M. But it's the Yankees and big media NY. Win at any cost.

[a700hitter]

I don't think it was a princess pea act. I think he was just too lazy to ever really stay in shape. He won a WS as a rookie, got paid, won a second WS and the just stopped giving a s***.

 

I think that is true. He became self-centered and complacent.

[Dojji]

So if he got hurt during the ALCS, why did he suck so much in the ALDS?

 

he was hurt in the ALDS too. In fact if I recall correctly the actual injury came in late August or early September -- too late to easily replace him in the rotation so he stayed out there and did his best.

[Dojji]

I didn't say that it wasn't the right business move. I am just saying that Pedro on the 2005 team could have brought another championship. I still believe that.

 

I don't. If we'd had Pedro, even if he'd pitched exactly as well as he did in the NL East (which I doubt) he'd have been the only pitcher in our rotation with an ERA south of 4.

 

We had the bats to contend but we weren't even close to having the arms.

[rjortiz]

I don't. If we'd had Pedro, even if he'd pitched exactly as well as he did in the NL East (which I doubt) he'd have been the only pitcher in our rotation with an ERA south of 4.

 

We had the bats to contend but we weren't even close to having the arms.

 

1) Overstating/understating

2) False equivalency

3) Off-topic

4) Focusing on a component instead of the overall package

5) Cherry-picking

6) Not understanding the terms they are criticizing

[Bellhorn04]

1) Overstating/understating

2) False equivalency

3) Off-topic

4) Focusing on a component instead of the overall package

5) Cherry-picking

6) Not understanding the terms they are criticizing

 

Huh? His post was pretty straightforward.

[rjortiz]

Huh? His post was pretty straightforward.

 

Overstating the NL/AL transition. Understating the Red Sox chances to win the World Series with Pedro. Real odds between 12-20%, not 0%. He still doesn't understand how WAR or FIP is calculated for pitchers. Assuming that Pedro needed to pitch exactly like he did for the Red Sox as he did with the Mets to be as valuable. At least, he got back on topic which was about Pedro and the 2006 Red Sox, and not the other three years.

 

Go through the rest of his posts if you want to see examples of the other ones.

Edited February 14, 2014 by rjortiz

[Bellhorn04]

Overstating the NL/AL transition. Understating the Red Sox chances to win the World Series with Pedro. Real odds between 12-20%, not 0%. He still doesn't understand how WAR or FIP is calculated for pitchers. Assuming that Pedro needed to pitch exactly like he did for the Red Sox as he did with the Mets to be as valuable. At least, he got back on topic which was about Pedro and the 2006 Red Sox, and not the other three years.

 

Go through the rest of his posts if you want to see examples of the other ones.

 

No, I've read plenty of Dojji's posts. Are you going to reply to every one of his posts now with your list of the 6 deadly faults? Lighten up a bit...we're all just bored and re-hashing old history here for something to do.