Dipre

Except he can actually play Defense.

And the irrational Beltre hate continues. Like clockwork.

Beckett, however, like every year, is sporting his "ST beer gut". Lol Beckett.

Carlos Pena is also a possibility if they lose out on Gonzales and lose V-Mart. He's like Adrian Gonzales light.

Park dominates righties. If you know that he has trouble against lefties, do you think the team that signs him doesn't? And another thing, last year wasn't "sorta decent" it was a very good year. 2008 was sorta decent.

I don't know how i'm the only one who sees the positives. A reliever who's had two solid years back-to-back, and wouldn't be guaranteed a roster spot or much guaranteed money. He blows up, you cut him lose, he pitches well, you get a good performance for next to nothing.

4.35 career ERA. Over the last two years, he's logged 120 innings of sub-4.00 ERA ball as a reliever. And he'd be a "Just in case" signing. With the volatility of relievers, depth can end up being huge as the grind of the season goes on. This is the type of signing that usually helps the team the most in its time of greater need.

For the record: Chan Ho Park as a reliever last year with the Phillies. Global: 2.52 ERA, 50.0 IP, 52 K, 16 BB, .576 OPS against. Split: .661 OPS vs lefties. .513 OPS vs righties. A good move (even if only a depth move) is still a good move regardless of the team that makes it.

Citizen's Bank Park. Depth.

Park would be decent if employed at the lower echelons of the bullpen. It would be a depth signing, and a good one at that.

Red Sox- Daniel Bard. MLB- Brandon Wood.

Ah, good point. Papi's .716 OPS vs LHP should indicate a cut in playing time against lefties.

This year, they can very much exploit the fact that Varitek can still hit LHP. Played right, Tek's the best offensive backup C in the majors.

I can't find the link now, but i remember reading somewhere that after the V-Mart trade was completed, the Guardians GM advised Theo not to let V-Mart catch much more than 110 games to keep his offense in top shape.

We're talking about issues with the starting rotation. Please read above. They lost CMW, but as you always say, what you need is "Three consistent starters" or is that untrue now?

When in the context of market value, i honestly don't feel Drew is overpaid when looking at his overall production.

The Yankees had three starters who made 30+ starts and pitched 190+ innings. The Yankees back end of the rotation was inconsistent, but they never faced major problems. Had the Sox had that last year, they may have given the Yankees a run for their money.

The question has been taken out of context: Has Drew's production been worth $14 million per season in the context of market value?

While this is a fair criticism, (the FO did kinda bid against themselves) do you believe Drew hasn't been worth the money he's been paid so far?

Any team who experiences major difficulties with its Starting Pitching is screwed, regardless of its offensive firepower.

Let me rationalize this: OPS measures how well a player gets on base and hits for power, how can it not be important? Batting average basically is a part of OBP if you want to see it that way, although in some situations, it's very true that a hit is better than a walk, but a walk is always better than an out, don't see how that can be disputed. Anyone who's seen the Red Sox play for an extended period of time doesn't need statistics to tell Drew plays a good RF, that is undisputable. Drew has his flaws. He could stand to be more aggresive at the plate, and his durability is an undeniable issue. It's unfair, however, to criticize the negatives without admitting the positives. Reading the article is a good source of knowledge, as it also talks about the negatives, but sheds light on the overlooked positives. If you don't take the time to read the article but come in guns blazing, that really discredits your opinion. It would be a good idea to actually discuss the merits of the article or what you think of Drew, while taking it seriously.