elsrbueno

this one turned ugly in a hurry. maybe wells needs rehab, and to lose a few hundred pounds of fat, and add some muscle, and re-learn how to pitch...... Why does every player break out of their slumps against the Red Sox?

Nope. He's signed an extension that basically makes him a Red Sox until he retires.

thanks. I had no idea that Embree AND Timlin were both up for free agency next year.

Sizzlin, Not sure where you get that idea that he's a slow starter. Over the past three years, he's a .290 hitter in April. Year: AVG/OBP/SLG 2002: .284/.337/.375 2003: .337/.372/.558 2004: .293/.361/.415 3YR: .307/.357/.456 Considering that his career averages are .288/.345/.399, I wouldn't necessarily classify him as a slow starter-- unless there's something I'm not seeing. He actually looks to be a bit better than his career averages in April.

The fact that he's pitching in Colorado no doubt has a lot to do with his struggles, and if you ask guys like Denny Neagle, Mike Hampton, etc they'll tell you that pitching half your games at Coors even messes with you when you're on the road. Now, Jennings is young and can rebound, but who knows just how good this guy is? Having spent his entire career with the Rockies to date, and statistics need to be taken with a grain of salt. Here is ESPN's scouting report on Jennings: Sounds like a pitcher with a Derek Lowe/Matt Clement type makeup to me, which means there's a chance the Sox could help him turn around... but is it worth it?

Does anyone know where I can find a list of potential 2005-2006 free agents?

For the record, I used stubhub.com when I bought my LA Dodgers and Anaheim Angels (I refuse to call them by that other name) tickets and it worked out great. You end up paying more than the box office, but the availability is pretty good. Red Sox tickets are wicked expensive, but I wouldn't think twice about buying through stubhub again.

I think calling him a bust is going a bit too far. He's struggled, yes. He's been a dissapointment, yes... but he's been more productive than Magglio Ordonez in his new contract! Edgar's an easy target because of his large contract, and despite my writings that he hasn't lived up to the hype, I still pointed out that the season's young and that a little time will prove the Sox made a good move. So much can change in half a season. Remember in July of 2004 when Javy Vazquez was the savoir of New York's rotation?!? After his horrible second half, yankee fans were calling for his head. Like Tito said: Edgar's too good a player to keep struggling. (He was 2-5 last night, too)

What the hell's up with D-Train and Garland getting all the love when Harden and Myers have been just as good?!? http://www.18eaststreet.com/bbsite/24.html Win-Loss record doesn't mean crap.

I disagree that Cabrera is doing all that much worse, especially considering that Renteria's playing half his games at Fenway Park. Defensively Cabrera's been superior in all areas than Edgar, and even though Cabrera's got a lower batting average, he's shown better plate discipline (more walks, less strikeouts) and has a higher slugging percentage. I have to admit that I was one of the guys who advocated re-signing Cabrera over Renteria simply because Renteria would have come at a higher cost, but I'm also looking at the numbers the only number where Renteria's better is batting average. I understand that Edgar's still adjusting to his new surroundings, and even though Orlando Cabrera struggled after coming to Boston last year he still hit .278 with 3 homers and 14 RBIs in his August last year (which spanned 115 at bats). I also understand that it's a long season, and that over time Edgar Renteria has been the better player, and he will probably straighten himself out and finish the season ahead of the other two. I would not have advised signing Eckstein, no... I was just making a statement-- he has been the best offensive player so far.

So far Renteria's definately not living up to the hype. Here's a comparison between Renteria, Cabrera, and Eckstein, the three shortstops who swapped teams last year. http://www.18eaststreet.com/bbsite/23.html

hey beeeeotches. FYI-- I'm not in a van down by the river

I voted for Schill from that list, but I am also a big fan of Trot Nixon, Bill Mueller and of course David Ortiz.

I'm Theo and Schilling.

A few friendly reminders: The Sox WILL NEVER face the Twins in the World Series unless there's some reconstruction of the leagues, and it definatelty won't happen in 2005. Also, the Angels WON'T play Seattle in the first round of the playoffs. Another impossibility. That being said, my predictions: AL East: Yankees AL Central: Twins AL West: Angels AL Wildcard: Red Sox OK, Crespo will probably have my head for this, but I am going to predict the Yankees will win the division again this year. Of course I hope I'm wrong.... NL East: Atlanta NL Central: St. Louis NL West: San Diego (OK, I also predicted them last year....but they're certainly not worse than last year and no NL West team is really far and away better than another) NL Wildcard: Mets I've vowed never to predict any other team in the NL East until the Braves are unseated, because John Schurholtz always seems to bring in the right players, and Bobby Cox seems to get his players to play at their best. Not to mention Leo Mazzone has one miracle pitcher each season. The Braves have effectively added 2.5 starters this year (Hudson, Smoltz, Ramirez was injured ), which makes them as good as last year. The Mets have improved a lot, and I've picked them for the Wild Card because I don't think they'll have enough to overtake the Braves. St. Louis is still a better team (in my mind) than the Cubs, and I really picked San Diego at random because the NL West can be anyone's division.... except Colorado... I refuse to make playoff predictions yet, because so much is going to change in the next 7 months. Teams that may surprise folks (and play well): Cleveland (if Millwood can turn himself around), Philadelphia (Jon Lieber may really help these guys out) Teams that may surprie folks (and play poorly): Seattle, Baltimore. Both of these teams improved offensively, but don't have enough in the way of pitching to really stick around (in my mind).

Which is going to mean more hits falling in, which is going to hurt Pavano's lofty 2004 numbers, which were by far his best season to date.

But the fact that he isn't able to get strikeouts like Javy was is going to hurt him when he's got the Yankee defense behind him. It isn't even close to what he had last year in Florida.

Javy for Randy is definately a good trade for the Yankees in 2005, but if Vazquez can bounce back from what was really only one bad half season, this is a move that may hurt the Yankees long term. No doubt in my mind Randy Johnson will be a better pitcher in 2005 than Vazquez. That's not the point I was trying to make. My point was that Vazquez was a better pitcher than Wright or Pavano before coming to the American League..... so John's comment about you hating Pavano by year's end may not be too far off base.

John's got a point here. Javy Vazquez has had a better track record than Jaret Wright OR Carl Pavano, which just puts that much more emphasis on the fact that those 2 guys are far from guaranteed success stories. And with ANY pitcher playing in Montreal, W-L needs to be thrown out the window. (I actually believe that W-L means very little in general since it depends largely upon the team surrounding the pitcher, but especially in this case).

In all fairness to Yanksin2010, Vazquez DID give up 33 HR and faced 849 batters. That's a homerun every 25 at bats, or considering that he made 32 starts.... about 1 homer every start. Compare that to, say, Mike Mussina who gave up 22 gopherballs in 697 plate appearances. That's a homer every 31 ABs..... So, he does have a point. Of any Yankee pitcher in 2004 (who pitched a significant amount of innings) he was the easiest to hit a homerun against. Just ask Johnny Damon.

Can't hurt to add another arm, epecially one that throws 95 (if that's true) Does anyone have a real source on this? Either way, does anyone have any more information on this guy? In my mind, the Red Sox bullpen is their greatest weakness.... is this guy the answer?

Personally, I'm sad to see Minky go, BUT We knew this was going to happen. Minky's role (had he stayed) would have been as a very expensive defensive replacement for Millar. Dave McCarty will be able to fill that role now. I don't know anything about the prospect we got, but if Zenny's not high on him, that doesn't give me a lot of confidence. It's too bad, but Minky's sub-par 2004 really made him a lot less marketable...

Some things that are worrysome about Vazquez: He was 9-4 with a 4.13 ERA at home (Yankee Stadium is a pitchers park), and 5-6 with a 5.79 ERA on the road. He definately struggled in the second half last year (4-5 with a 6.92 ERA and a .286 BAA) His K's/9, Ks/BB numbers were way down in 2005 (granted, that was probably mostly hurt by his troublesome second half) He struggled against Boston last year, arguably the next best offense to NY in the American League, and had an 8.10 ERA in Fenway. It's hard to say WHY he struggled so badly in the second half of 2004, and who knows if he'd get back to his 2003 numbers (in which case I'd take him in Boston in a SECOND), but there are some numbers that would indicate he would struggle as a member of the Red Sox. Could the second half of 2004 have just simply been an adjustment period to his new league, new team, the pressures of winning in NY? Sure.... but he carries a hefty price tag for someone who has obvious question marks about his performance. One reason NOT to give Payton for him: Trot Nixon struggles MIGHTILY against LHP. Who'd play RF when there's a lefty on the hill? Randy Johnson, Steve Kline, BJ Ryan are just a few tough lefties in our division who could shut Trot down in a key spot. Who'd be the 4th outfielder? I believe Vazquez has potential to be a #2/#3 starter, and would have been thrilled had Theo traded for him a year ago. However, his 2004 season does have reasons for concern.

Robb Nenn hasn't pitched since 2002, and as nasty as he was in 2002, his K/9 and K/BB numbers were trending downward since 2000 before he got hurt. Also, his BAA was trending upward in those 3 seasons..... He's worth a minor league contract with an invitation to ST, but I'd be worried about a seemingly healthy 34 year old arm with those trends.... let alone someone who's been basically out of action 2 years. Rod Beck was actually a decent pitcher throughout his Red Sox career, and in 2003 with San Diego pitched very well (in limited work though). In 2004 he pitched in even fewer games, and was not effective. San Diego released him August 17th, 2004, but he doesn't seem to have the injury issues Nen had. Still, at 36, Beck is also a big risk.

He certainly isn't as efficient as Podsednik or Crawford.... but as far as pure baserunning ability is concerned.... I wouldn't be able to say because I haven't seen any of them enough...