a700hitter

I would not underestimate the greatness of Yaz. Don't forget that his prime years were in a pitching dominated era with a higher mound -- that got lowered in 1969 (Yaz's 9th season). For a power hitter, he rarely struck out. If you compared him to the other power hitters from his era, his k's per 162 games and per HR were pretty phenomenal. Pedro is the pitching equivalent of Yaz in that he dominated in a hitting dominate era while Yaz did so in a pitching dominated era.

And the pipedream of getting King Felix officially goes up in smoke. The mariners did the smart thing. Stud aces are rare. You don't let them go. We will be waiting for a long time before one hits the FA and we outbid the Yank, Dodgers, Angels and others. We need to build a deep rotation of non-aces until one comes up through our system. Don't hold your breath.

He was never a great pitcher and we have seen the worst of him. He's 34 and and post-op. He has been the poster boy for bad FA contracts for pitchers, and now, the Sox are trying to sell us on him as reason to be optimistic. Are they freakin kidding?

The whole discussion isn't relevant as we have been debating a throw away line in a post where I said: The point that I was making is that it is pretty desperate that our fortunes are tied to Lackey in 2013. His record at Fenway is not that relevant. You said that my statement that he sucked at Fenway was not true. Doji disagreed, and we digressed. Overall, his Fenway record with the Angels has been spotty at best, and there were periods where we downright hammered him, but as I said, his Fenway record as an Angel is not really relevant.

Yaz was the most significant player in the history of the Red Sox. Williams ws the best hitter of all time, but Yaz did everything else much better. Where Yaz vaults to the top of the pack for me is that the 1967 team revived the moribund franchise that was considering leaving Fenway and Boston. The trajectory of the franchise changed with that season, and that was the season of Yaz. Beyond 1967 the Red Sox remained as a winning and competitive franchise with teams built around Yaz. After 1967, the Sox failed to field a winning team only once for the rest of Yaz career -- in 1983 (Yaz's last season). From 1967 to 1982, they finished above .500 for 16 straight seasons. That is the longest streak in the history of the franchise. Yaz was the leader on most of those teams. He is the player who made the most significant contributions to the Red Sox in the era that turned the Red Sox franchise around and made them not just relevant again, but beloved. The Red Sox need to commission a statue in his honor at Fenway, because I truly believe that Fenway might have been long gone had it not been for Yaz. For that matter, the Red Sox might not be in Boston either. I'd like to this done while he is still around for the dedication.

It looks like overall he was not good at Fenway during his Angel years.

He got hammered at Fenway in 2004 (10.80 ERA) and 2003 (9.90 ERA - 2 starts) too.

I remember him getting hit pretty hard by us, but my that was based on my recollection.

Cafardo has a good article in today's Globe on Farrell. He noted how last spring training Valentine ran more drills stressing fundamentals and that the players resented it. On veteran infielder complained "Are we in AA?" Then the team went out and played terrible fundamental baseball. The article states that we can look forward to a "more traditional" spring training where the emphasis is on startinfg the season healthy. I am sure that it will include plenty of golf, fishing and sunbathing too. We can probably look forward to another season of substandard fundamentals, because as Cafardo points out at the end of the article:

Do you want to discuss this and we can exchange our ideas or do you want to persist in being an asshat telling me what I think and what I would think? If you you want to exchange ideas, I'm in. Otherwise, STFU.

Bridge Year -- cost $170 million. Just asinine.

http://www.amazon.com/My-Turn-Bat-Fireside-Classics/dp/0671634232#reader_0671634232 This should be available at the Library

I read Teddy Ballgame's autobiography when I was a kid. I believe that it was entitled, "My Turn At Bat." It was an excellent book. His was a rich life, so there is plenty of material. I'd be happy to share stories that I have heard.

The other authorities referred to that have picked us at the bottom of the pile are not oddsmakers.

No misunderstanding. Suffice to say that teams that are in the middle of the pack or below at the opening odds are not thought to be very good. There is no action at the time the initial odds are set to sway the odds. The initial odd setting is based on an evaluation of the relative strengths of the teams.

Wins will not correlate to the changes as directly and precisely as you are expecting. These numbers are very loose. Bottom line is I expect 79-84 wins. The only reason I expect some improvement is because we added talent to the pen. All the rest is a wash or worse. Your numbers will not translate to wins with such a direct correlation. Vegas and all other objective authorities view us as a 4th place or last place team.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1467880-predicting-the-final-2013-mlb-standings/page/2 The Bleacher Report predicts that the Sox will finish last. Objective authorities do not think this is a 90 win team. Cafardo is calling it a Bridge Year in his column today.

None of these numbers are precise. There are no direct correlations. If Lester returns to form, one or two of the other pitchers will under perform or get injured. Here's what I see as the difference in the 2013 team over the 2012 team and I have said this before. This is also not precise or a guarantee: The improved bullpen will add 10 wins Improved performance from Lester will add 5 wins at most Lackey adds nothing as he is replacing Beckett-- a wash. I see them topping out at 84 wins with a range from 79-84 wins. No talent has been added except in the pen, so the results will b pretty much the same except for the late inning pen. Guys who under performed last year may perform this year, but other guys will offset that with under performance. Everyone will not meet performance expectations. It just doesn't happen that way.

By blowing up the 2011 bull pen taking it from the top late inning pen to one of the worst. That cost about 10-12 games. The starting pitching was thin evidenced by two rookie starters in the rotation. One blew up spectacularly. The other performed admirably. The hole in the rotation was never filled--- that cost about 5 games or more. Lester's under performance cost about 5 games.

I believe that my tickets are for the 6th,7th and 9th, but I'd have to check. I may also go to a Sox game at Hammond stadium against the twinkies.

I have never accused you of being crazy-- just very optimisitic. I am not the only one that thinks 6 AL teams are better than us. Here are the Vegas odds as of today: Here is the full list of odds to win the 2013 World Series, along with odds to win the NL and AL pennants. 2013 WORLD SERIES ANGELS 7-1 DODGERS 7-1 TIGERS 7-1 NATIONALS 8-1 BLUE JAYS 10-1 REDS 12-1 YANKEES 14-1 BRAVES 14-1 PHILLIES 14-1 GIANTS 14-1 CARDINALS 14-1 RAYS 16-1 RANGERS 18-1 A'S 30-1 RED SOX 30-1 WHITE SOX 40-1 ROYALS 40-1 DIAMONDBACKS 50-1 ORIOLES 50-1 PIRATES 50-1 CUBS 50-1 BREWERS 60-1 MARINERS 80-1 Guardians 80-1 METS 100-1 PADRES 100-1 TWINS 100-1 ROCKIES 100-1 MARLINS 300-1 ASTROS 300-1

I'll be there for my annual trip-- March 5th - 12th.

So we agree that Nava is not a good depth option if Ortiz goes down?

If Ortiz misses substantial time, this team will be in big trouble.

Also, Penny had known shoulder issues.