Dojji

Victorino can serve that job for Bradley, we're well set up for Ellsbury's departure really, even if I'd definitely rather not see him go. If all we have at short is Bogaerts and a utility man, we're inviting trouble. I don't think he'll implode like Middlebrooks did this year, but if you don't plan as if it might happen, you're inviting a world of hurt down on your head if it does. I actually suspect that if we let Drew go he'll wind up playing for the Yankees. A-Rod is too old to move back to SS and Jeter is probably retiring either this offseason or next, and in either case, the Yankees can't count on him to take the field at any given time. In other words, they need a shortstop.

You know, I checked the federal state and local lawbooks and I never saw that written anywhere. Maybe I missed it? You choose to be a dick when someone makes an ill-informed statement. you don't HAVE to be one at any time.

If you don't want to sign Drew, then go after Peralta. What you absolutely do not do is turn a rookie loose at shortstop without a valid Plan B. That's not how you develop a prospect.

I'm not saying absolutely don't play Bogaerts. I'm saying don't write him in as the starting shortstop in pen in the offseason. Nomar beat Valentin to become our starting SS. That competition was had. Valentin had to be beat and beat he was, but the team made sure that the rookie earned his job, which is the way you do it. This team knows that as well as anyone, it's how they developed Youk, Pedey, Ellsbury, and all of their pitchers. MAKE them earn their time, and then LET them earn their time. It's the winning combination. I'm saying do the exact same thing that this team did with all of Nomar, Ellsbury, Pedroia, Youkilis, Lester, Papelbon, etc, etc, etc, and make it a competition. If Bogaerts is as ready as Nomar was, the competition will be over fairly quickly and we'll have one heck of a talented infield (if somewhat overpaid). If not, you'll be glad we had a Plan B. but make the rookie earn his job.

You do know that the Red Sox kept their former starting shortstop on the team for years after Nomar was made the starter right? They had a use for him and no reason to move him so stay he did. John Valentin was with the team all the way up into the early 2000's

*sighs that resigned sigh of someone who's watching people make the same mistake over and over again* I don't think we can count on Bogaerts to be a starting caliber fulltime shortstop next year guys. Leaning on a prospect to get it done in a full season just because he's a good prospect who's been effective in a partial season is a trap teams fall into all the time, and when you can manage against that kind of risk you always do it.

My Dan Butler Awareness Campaign seems to be paying off. But seriously, a young catcher doing what he's doing deserves more buzz than he gets right now. It's just his bad luck that not only is the field crowded with other solid catching prospects, some with more hype, but Salty is actually settling in at last and becoming an OK bat-first starting catcher.

I think Drew can do better. He's one of the better players at his position now that he's back to playing around his normal talent level. He's no superstud, which is why he isn't going to make 20M AAV, but I really do think that whoever gets Drew is going to pay handsomely for him.

Yeah, was already fixing that when you posted I meant $15M/year. The market tends to be very kind to good two-way shortstops since they're really hard to find.

I go 3/45 with Drew and don't even think about it very hard. A shortstop as solid as he is on both sides of the ball gets paid. THere's no point trying to be penny wise and pound foolish at shortstop.

Thinking mostly about 2007 here. It might have been circumstancial before, but at that point he made a deliberate choice between two strong offers and went to NY. And sure can't blame him for that, but you don't put a guy on that wall for things you can't blame him for.

I think our best bets are either Drake Britton or Alex Hassan.

Fisk never played for the Yankees, never won a World Series with the Yankees, and never repeatedly chose New York when he could have chosen Boston.

The only one on that list that I feel is definite is Pedro, and he's in just as soon as Cooperstown votes him in, likely in the first ballot. Roger, Bogs, and Dewey have not finishing their careers in Boston against them (although for Evans that's such a slight technicality I'd be all for overlooking it), and Boggs and Roger have playing for the Yankees against them. And Roger has PED against him. As for Evans... I mean, he was a very good right fielder, and one of the most underrated players of all time, but how many different seasons was he the most valuable player in the league at his position like Big Papi has been several times? Maybe I'm being a bit unfair, because Evans was mostly before my time as a serious baseball fan, but I'm just not seeing the level of transcendance for Evans that I see for Big Papi.

Has to be heartbreaking for Petit.

Soooooo close o man...

I heard of him years ago. He was supposed to be one heck of a pitching prospect. One more to go.

Maybe with the "F-ing" deleted. I'm sure fans loved the expletive, I'm just as sure the executives didn't.

Meanwhile, in San Francisco...

If the rivalry means anything you can't do it. Not that he just left the team, but where he went after. Every time since 96 he had the opportunity to choose Boston or New York, or Boston or anywhere else, he chose anywhere else, and he especially chose New York. 07 was the clincher for me. He could have had a ring with us, last chance. You know he'd have been better than Wake. But nope, Yankee bound again. Of course he'll cozy up now, there's money in it, and he belongs among the Red Sox great alumni if he genuinely wants to be there. But you can't put his number on that wall. You just can't. Every choice he made did since 96 and every time he could have come back and didn't when it might have made a difference tells you why. Even if he was snubbed initially in 96, he still made his choice every other time he could have come back and didn't. He'll go to the Hall in a Yankees cap if he gets in at all, due to his performance in the Dynasty years. If by some miracle he actually chooses to get inducted as a Red Sox, then you look at it again. Since he was great for both teams, he may once again have a choice. But if he chooses wrong, you can't put Clemens on that wall. That's exactly what I honestly think will wind up happening. He'll choose NY one last time, and that's the end of it. Maybe he even goes up on THEIR wall. Maybe, but I doubt it.

Ortiz is one of the best players to play full time DH in MLB history. The only reason he doesn't make the hall is that sportswriters from National League towns will never vote for a DH. If we're going to hold that against Big Papi just because chauvenists in NL towns do, I consider that sad and pathetic.

This is just me personally, but I'd have no problem retiring Evans. He's a hard luck loser in the Hall of Fame debate because his best offensive ability (OBP)he did best wasn't recognized much until long after he retired. Before you counted walks or OPS as really important, Evans was... eh. Pretty consistent 20-30 Hr guy, great defender. Not bad surely, but the world has seen that before. Once you count walks and OPS, Evans is suddenly retroactively one of the best offensive players in his generation with several fantastic offensive seasons. I can think of a great many reasons not to retire Roger Clemens' number in Boston, so even if I don't necessarily agree with all ot those reasons myself, "lock" is an overstatement. Agreed about Pedro though. The most dominant pitcher in baseball history needs to be on the wall of the team he played his best years for. The Red Sox organization need to be a little less sticks in the mud here and loosen up the retiring rules. Requiring HoF status to retire a number when there are whole categories of players the sportswriters WILL NOT VOTE into the Hall regardless of contribution, is wrong.

You could make a definite argument for Varitek as a catcher. He holds a couple records for his position as I recall and he did play a sizeable role in the WS wins.

The 2000 hit milestone got me thinking. David Ortiz is a man who won't be forgotten quickly when it's time for him to go. He was a huge part of our only 2 world series wins since 1917, he's compiling some impressive longevity stats, and he holds a few club records, including one of the biggies (single season HR, for his 2006 performance). He's probably going to finish his career with the team and pick up a few Hall of Fame votes, even if the NL chauvenists would balk at letting a DH in and that and the PED *rumors* probably close the door on Cooperstown. I think you have to retire Ortiz's number when he retires. I think he's done enough right now, that if his career ended tomorrow for some non-scandalous reason (say a career ending injury) it's in the realm of thought for his number to be retired. If the team's rules don't allow Ortiz to be retired, that's a better reason to change those rules than it is not to honor the man. His statistical contributions are significant and his REAL contributions rise far above the numbers. Just my $.02, I wonder what other people think. Not really expecting this to be a deep or major topic, it's just something I was thinking about due to the milestone.

Didn't Chuck Finley try this once with the A's? He'd try everything. The flaw in the idea is that you can't pretend you can predict how far into a game a reliever can go and having multiple pitchers committed to be available for tomorrow destroys your flexibility in the long run.