Jayhawk Bill

This might be a good game.

Chris Carter enjoys the view from the bench in Fenway again.

Rough MLE of Carter's 2008 AAA stats: .285/.335/.480 2008 BP PECOTA for Carter: .261/.326/.399 2008 BP PECOTA for Carter vs. RHP: .269/.337/.438 Chris Carter's actual 2008 MLB stats: .000/.000/.000 Chris Carter needs regular playing time as a DH to show his stuff--he won't make it as a pinch-hitter. Sean Casey has that role. Want a hint as to Carter's role? Check the Official Red Sox site: http://boston.redsox.mlb.com/team/roster_active.jsp?c_id=bos Chris Carter is listed as the third left fielder and the third right fielder. (Insert banghead emoticon here). Bringing Chris Carter up to the team to sit on the bench and to pinch hit two or three times a week is destructive to his career and adverse to his skill set and his trade value. This is his moment--we've got to see what he can do. James Shields pitches tonight. He's an excellent right-handed pitcher, and he's posted 2.61 ERA since getting lit up by Boston on May 3. Let's see what Chris Carter can do.

Craig Breslow looks terrible to scouts. He's got a good curve, but his other pitches aren't MLB-caliber. That raw talent level is why he's with his fifth MLB organization. The thing with Breslow is that he's smart, and he figures out ways to beat hitters. Note that he got WORSE in his second year at AAA, his ERA going from 2.69 to 4.06--the batters caught on after a while. MLB batters can't be tricked as long. He's only got 40 MLB IP, it was with four different teams in three different years, and his WHIP is already 1.60, so that low MLB career ERA might be misleading. I like Craig Breslow. I'm sorry that he didn't get more of a chance with Boston in 2006, but I can't fault how the FO used him in 2007, nor can I fault their releasing him once he was out of options.

No. Given my post, you know exactly how important I see it as being. *** Let's try Carter first, though.

I'd love to see either Barry Bonds or Chris Carter given a chance. My preference: immediately give Chris Carter a few at bats and start talking with Barry Bonds' agent, whomever it currently is. If Carter starts his MLB career batting .300/.400/.500, cool off on Bonds; if Carter hits a more reasonable .280/.350/.440, give Bonds a chance to show the city where he swore he'd never play what he can do.

With you--that's why I posted this in the Big Papi thread. I do, however, admire your economy of both words and keystrokes in communicating your point.

I think that using terms like "spin" when referring to careful objective analysis of players' values--as you did in your 3:52 PM post--is a fairly condescending attempt to de-base an argument--a pretty valid one at that. Not at all, especially if a team intends to sacrifice future years' chances for a current victory, or if the talent and value is roughly equal, just timed differently. Last I checked, though, the Red Sox were trying to contend for the next half-decade, and Hanley Ramirez is by far the best player in the deal. You know, Ryne Sandberg was a throw-in on a trade of shortstops, Larry Bowa for Ivan DeJesus. He was sixth in ROY balloting the very next season. Bowa and DeJesus were both still OK for a few years; DeJesus helped the Phillies get to the 1983 World Series. Three years after the trade, though, Sandberg played the first of ten consecutive All Star seasons, and I don't know anybody who says that the 1983 World Series berth was worth the loss of Sandberg for Philadelphia. We may be in that situation. Yes, Beckett + Lowell > DeJesus, but, scarily, thus far Hanley Ramirez > Ryne Sandberg. Sandberg didn't have a season above league average at the plate until age 24; at age 24, Hanley has a career batting line of .310/.371/.515, excellent for a DH/1B and outstanding for a shortstop. Thank you. Perhaps prior posts where that consideration was not offered led me to use absurd extensions of the "Beckett was invaluable" argument. While we all know that Gagne wasn't indispensable, by the logic that Beckett and Lowell were irreplaceable, so was Gagne. Maybe the logic others--and you--used to support Beckett's trade was faulty. 1) If you trade hitters as much more valuable as Hanley Ramirez is at his salary for pitchers as valuable as Josh Beckett, you will lose--you will give away talent needlessly. 2) Beckett DID NOT pick Boston up off of its ass in Cleveland. Boston hitters scored seven runs in Game Five. Average MLB pitching--heck, replacement-level pitching--would have sufficed for that win. 3) Boston wants a good team for the "Big Game," and no players are acquired strictly for past postseason performances. Furthermore, it's nice that Beckett is 6-2 in postseason series now, but he was just 2-2 in postseason with the Marlins--I don't think that the 2-2 record was the determining factor in the trade, as you suggest. You would trade away Hanley Ramirez every time for Josh Beckett when AJ Burnett was easily available at roughly the same salary that it took to extend Beckett? Even knowing that Burnett would post roughly the same ERA, you'd give away the future Rookie of the Year and All Star shortstop, accepting Julio Lugo instead? Tonight you posted, regarding Julio Lugo:

My understanding is that Bailey has holes in his swing that better-disciplined MLB pitchers can work to their advantage, while Carter is a complete batter whose stats will translate well to MLB. Neither Carter nor Bailey can play defense. Regarding Bailey at catcher, at age 20 in Rookie League he caught 21 games and had 3 errors and 6 passed balls. After that, he was predominantly a first baseman, and he remained prone to passed balls and errors when he did catch.

Chris Carter is hitting .316/.372/.536.

Which might make it a good time to keep Dustin in the lineup for another couple of games until Big Papi is better, or at least one more game until Tek is back in the lineup. BTW, Will Carroll estimated a total of three games out for Big Papi at BP today.

In 11 starts this year, Tim Wakefield has allowed 4 or more earned runs only three times. In the 8 starts where he's allowed three or fewer earned runs, he's got a record of just 2-2. That's really bad luck: contrast Wakefield to Daisuke Matsuzaka, who has 10 such starts and has accumulated a 7-0 record in those games. Part of that, though, is run support. Boston is averaging 5.07 runs per game, but just 4.87 runs per 27 outs in Wakefield's starts. That's not Kevin Cash's fault--he's been hitting fine thus far in 2008--but it seems that Tito uses Wakefield's starts to rest his better batters. Tonight Big Papi and Pedroia, as well as Tek, are out of the lineup.

BTW, Eric Gagne closed out the first game and sixth game of the 2007 ALCS with scoreless ninth innings. Boston needed every win against Cleveland, and Gagne allowed no runs in those two outings. Furthermore, he was a significant part of Boston's clubhouse chemistry in August and September, often distracting the media from addressing other players' shortcomings as the Yankees kept closing the gap on the Red Sox. Does that make the Gagne trade a good trade? After all, we've taken to evaluating trades by neither salaries involved nor talent metrics, but just by whether it was part of a Championship Season--and the Gagne trade was indisputably a big part of that 2007 season and postseason.

Thank you! This post will be a wonderful source of quotes in the future--that's why I quoted the whole thing before you could edit. :thumbsup:

Absolutely. It's in the voting rules. OK...Vince Coleman says, "Hi."

How can anyone consider weekend games in Camden Yards to be road games for the Boston Red Sox?

BS. I worked with Yankees fans for decades. They were insufferable and arrogant, most especially, and increasingly, from 1996 to 2003, but even during 1986 through 1990, when all that they could do is accuse Boggs and Clemens of being chokers and talk about how Don Mattingly was destined for the Hall of Fame. The insults in the late 1970's approached those of the 1996-2003 timeframe. But perhaps the worst thing, ARod2212, is that Yankees fans are still trash-talking the Red Sox. In my circle, it seems that it's all that they know how to do, and that they vacillate between continuing the trash talk ("Jeter rulz;" "Joba-Hughes-Kennedy;" "26 to 6") and whining ("Except for the midges;" "We're alwayz better over 162 games"). What I see is that, for the very first time in my moderately long life, a rival team of the Yankees has acquired a following that approaches the Yankees' huge fan base, and the Yankees have seemed incapable of prevailing for almost half of a decade. Now Yankees fans are getting back something approaching what they've dished out for decades, there's no good comeback, and, suddenly, it sucks being a Yankees fan. So you revert to whining: "My point is that vitriol towards the Red Sox during the Yankees 90s run was not nearly as pronounced as it was the other way around in '04 and '07." Yeah, right. Given the strength of the Rays and the Blue Jays, let alone that of the Red Sox, you might want to adjust your expectations for a few years. The Yankees will continue to be one of MLB's elite teams, but there are four of those elite teams in the AL East right now.

Anibal Sanchez was certainly highly regarded. Last year in isolation? No single starting pitcher, of course--but a combination of Hanley Ramirez, AJ Burnett and Anibal Sanchez, plus whatever first baseman took Lowell's place (probably Carlos Pena, given that he actually made the team in 2006) would've exceeded the contributions of Beckett, Lowell and, umm, Julio Lugo in 2007. From 2006-2007? Those stats are earlier in the thread--it's not even close with Beckett's bad 2006. From 2006-2008? Well, I just posted the 2008 stats...Hanley Ramirez is worth more than every other player in the deal this year...almost twice as much, in fact, and that's not even considering salary. In the 2007 postseason? Boston scored 34 runs in Beckett's four wins, no fewer than four in each game. One quality start in the ALDS and three games allowing six or fewer ruuns would have sufficed--hardly the stuff of legend. Had Beckett's start been lost in the ALDS, it would've been 2-1 Boston after three games...again, not an impossible challenge. *** The only way I can see anybody supporting Boston's having won the trade is that the Red Sox won the 2007 World Championship, a far from trivial feat. But the fact that Boston did it with Lowell and Beckett doesn't mean that it could not have been done with Sanchez, Ramirez, and the talent that millions of salary dollars could have bought.

You know, Manny is a pretty good DH. http://www.examiner.com/a-1419000~Ortiz_out_with_hurt_wrist__Ramirez_steps_in_at_DH.html

If you look back, I did factor in the World Series performances, at significant premium. Of course, we paid Beckett the money that could've signed AJ Burnett, and we gave away Anibal Sanchez in the deal. Sanchez was 12-4 with a 3.24 ERA in his MLB time, and he might still be pitching today had the Marlins used him more carefully. Burnett has been 25-21 for the Blue Jays with an ERA since 2006 comparable to Beckett's. *** I understand that Boston won the 2007 World Series with Lowell and Beckett, and it's tough to see that the team might've been even better without them. It's also tough to see salary dollars as convertible into talent directly, and it's true that signing good free agent starting pitchers got significantly tougher after 2005-2006. I still see the trade as a loss for Boston and a win for the Marlins. Certainly other posters made it clear that they saw the issue differently this past winter, and I respect that perspective. I still disagree with that position, though, and 2008 stats are looking pretty good for Hanley Ramirez. Again.