Dojji

I didnt' say it was, but when the kid doesn't want to come out, it can be a hard call to pull him.

For the record, I really miss Youk. If I thought for a minute that bringing him back to play first base would bring the old numbers back, I'd be all for a 1 year flier.

If you're a coach in The Big Game, the question frequently centers around how hard you're going to try to hold the kid back, not how hard you're going to try to push him forward.

I agree with SK. Any team with a hole at first base is going to be going over Napoli's scouting reports right now and looking up his agent's number. He produced at a very acceptable level and helped power this team to a World Championship. Someone's going to drop 3 years on him, and someone's going to drop 4 years on Drew.

Youk was a better candidate to hit for consistency. It was the power that was in question for youkilis and once he answered that question he spent 2-3 years as the best hitter in the American League. Consistency is crucial at first base offensively and there are legitimate questions about Middlebrooks' consistency. That's the difference between the idea of Youk at first base versus Middlebrooks. you knew that Youk would get on base and put up an OPS somewhere in the .800 range. Quite frankly, Youk's exactly the kind of 3B that makes a good transition across the diamond exactly because he was offensively consistent, and he was a player who at third base was making the most of his somewhat limited toolset with a combination of skill, savvy and hard work. Put a guy like that in a position where his toolset plays up more, and he thrives. On the other hand no one denies Middlebrooks has the toolset to thrive at third, offensive and defensive consistency is hisbugbear and that's not going to be helped by a move to first base.

There is nothing average about the year Stephen Drew gave us this year, RJOrtiz, and if you believe there is, you are very much wrong and should know better. For his position, Drew gave us excellent production on both sides of the ball taking the year as a whole. As for injury prone, he started the year with a concussion that held him out for most of the first month, and after that he missed only a handful of games the rest of the year, so you're wrong there too. Drew's number of games played (124) is in line with most of the rest of our starters, especially when you take the concussion into account. Only Dustin Pedroia started more than 140 games. All of our other starters were between 122 (Victorino) and 139 (Napoli). Drew's on the low end of that band, but he's right there.

That would be a strange decision, considering Drew would be easily leaving at least 2 years, possibly more, of guaranteed contract time on the table by accepting the QO. Making a decision like that going into one's age 31 season would be very odd indeed. Personally, looking at the situation from the perspective of the pre-Drew Sox, if you'd seen that guy on the market coming off a championship year in which he'd defended at a high level and hit well above league average, wouldn't you be calling for the Sox to shed a pick and go after the guy? He looks like he's proven he's back to his old self, and his old self would be worth a 5 year deal at decent money for his age 31-35 seasons. Personally I think Drew's done a great job of putting the ankle injury behind him and setting himself up for a multiyear contract. I'd love to have him back but I'd be surprised if some team or another wasn't prepared to make him a very tempting offer, especially with a ring under his belt at this point.

Possibly. I know I wouldn't be entirely comfortable with Lavarnway, because I'm a defense guy. This team would not have traded for VMart if it agreed with me however.

I'm under the impression that those high end high school tournaments are Japan's version of NCAA football bowl games. A huge national event in their own rights.

If you never start a rookie catcher, you'll never have a homegrown veteran at the dish. I can believe that they want to have a veteran on hand to help cushion them from the risks of running with the rook, but that's what Ross is for, and he's very good at it. I was very impressed with Cody Ross and would be comfortable leaning on him for a stretch if the rookie needs to go down to AAA and try to lose a bad habit.

We have too much young catching waiting in the wings for me to think a veteran starting catcher is coming to Boston. With Ross, we're perfectly set up to put the team's young future starter of choice on the roster with him and let the youngster learn on the job with Ross on hand to take over if there's a problem. The issue is that we have as many as three potential starters of choice, depending on whether you want to try to develop a catcher who's offense first (Lavarnway) one who won't hit that much but performs at a very high defensive level (Vazquez) or a guy who may not stand out along any one vector but is also notably short on glaring weaknesses (Butler). There's arguments for and against any single one of those three catchers, and if you asked me who should be in the lead, my answer is it comes down to team philosophy. Which since the team has valued offense from the catching position over other factors in the past, leads me to believe Lavarnway will get first crack. Personally I would go for Butler, if only because he's the oldest of the three and we will have opportunities later on to get a better look at the other two.

Pedro was part of teams more than once that he was literally the only reason they finished over .500

What? I mean, Butler is one of my guys, and I think he'll make someone a good backup at some point, but shedding both Lavarnway and Salty and starting him with Ross next year... ummhuzzawha? I mean it's not even like it has zero chance of working if it was tried, it's that there's NO way it will be tried. the FO likes to have a starting catcher who hits, and Butler isn't going to hit at first, his consistency at AAA is too low to expect it of him while he's adjusting to catching in the big leagues.

What on earth is this fascination with moving Middlebrooks to first base? Until he gets his consistency right Will Middlebrooks would be a very troubled first baseman. Besides, if there's a hole at first, you have to think that Mike Carp would get first crack at it, as a lefty power hitter he's the safer bet.

Not just that, but those tag end last years can destroy a player's legacy with the team. Not just the A-Rods either, look at all the hate a guy with the status of a Curt Schilling got when he tried and failed to come back in 08. that should have never happened to a guy of the standing Curt Schilling had in this community, but it did, because fans knew the team was paying for him out of our ticket revenues and our support and he spent that last year giving the team nothing meaningful. Now if you've got a guy who's still at least kinda getting it done in the field, that's one thing, but he'd better be giving you something, especially if the contract is a big one, or all heck breaks loose very quickly.

People need to stop obsessing about that. Players know the difference between having jewelry, and actually making a big contribution.

And if he'd held those numbers that contract would be defensible.

I disagree about Shields. Cargo is at least a little overrated, but durability of the kind Shields offers matters a great deal more than dominance, especially with our lineup. I want another 200 inning guy in this rotation. I think that the season KC had, winning over 85 despite having one of the worst offenses in the league, demonstrates why a durable rotation sets you up for success. Lester is good, a second guy who can pitch a full healthy season would be great. Shields is a guy I know about who's on the last year of his deal and has N-E-V-E-R failed to pitch at least 200 innings, and usually pirches closer to 230 than 200. That's impressive, which is why I want him. I've wanted him before KC got him, but knew the rays wouldn't trade him to us. Now we have a chance at him and I want to see it happen.

Then you don't get Cargo. you give, if you want to get. No one's taking our second raters and giving back a stud. Frankly I'd be interested in moving Cecchini, Owens and Buchholz to see if that might be enough to pry James Shields out of Kansas City. Shields isn't the ace KC bills him as but he's as durable as any man in this league and I want that kind of durable, 230+ inning frontline guy alongside Lester as a 1-2 punch, far more than I want a fragile guy who dominates on the rare occasions he's fully healthy. I think that overrides any concern about playing kids in positions we're already filling.

On the other hand, after thinking about it a minute, I think there's a deal that could be made for Carlos Gonzalez. But it begins with Garin Cecchini and moves upward from there. Cecchini and Owens probably could get you Cargo between them, or at least make up most of the weight in a trade.

I don't think they can pull the offer, but they can negotiate a contract at any time, which will override the old one if that's what both parties agree to.

ROFL With the flaws both Buchholz and Brentz possess, I doubt you could get 100 cents on the dollar for either of them, much less trading them for a much less flawed top CF.

I understand the attraction. It's worth looking into any way to improve the rotation for only money. That said I don't think Tanaka passes a cost benefit analysis for this team at this time.

I don't really have the spirit of non-American football. I get the basics, but I don't understand the nuances of the sport well enough I suppose. I prefer hockey, it's faster, more active, and takes place on a smaller floor, so it's easier to understand everything that's going on. maybe I ought to take the time to learn more about it.

Daisuke started going bad in August of 2007. Prior to August he was a bona fide ace. Something wore him down in his first year here and he never fully recovered even after surgery and rehab and everything the pitching coaches could do.