SoxSport

Young should pick up Bogar, too, on his way rounding 3rd. And the rest of those see no evil, hear no evil coaches. :thumbdown

The Sox should have made Lackey a preconditon for even allowing the Cubs to talk to Epstein. You want Epstein, you take Lackey. That's called hardball.

"beer/chickengate? " have to love that.

Youks is a converted 3rd baseman, and a better fielder than AdGon. He's bound to have better range. They gave away a lot in infield defense this year vs last year. VMart could have split DH, catching and 1B with Salty and Youks. They'd have been better off keeping VMart and Beltre, and not picking up Ortiz' option. And keeping those prospects they traded AdGon for. And, of course, not signing CC, who is a square peg in a round hole on this team. They would have had a better all-around team, even without Ortiz' offensive comeback. There are some good reasons why they let Theo go. I just listed some possibilities. plus Lackey.

I read the holdup with Epstein is something about players' medical reports. That could mean Lackey. It also could mean McNutt, who is coming off an injury-plagued year. or some other players.

I don't think Lucchino will let this happen. The ownership is in enough trouble with the fans. The Cubs have a lot to lose not getting Epstein, and the Red Sox have a lot to lose letting him go too easily.

I can't make any sense out the variety of media reports. Some of them conflicting. It sounds like Epstein is working in his Red Sox office, filling his future Cubs' staff by hiring away GMs of other teams. How does he get away with stuff like this? Well, that's baseball. It's the Selig Country Club, exempt from anti-trust rules.

Speaking of Berkman, did you see him at bat in the WS game tonite? The guy looks at least 10 lbs lighter than last year with the Yankees--a couple of inches off the waist. Trim and in shape. Amazing what a little conditioning will do to a player's performance--especially if he's over 30. Ditto for Papi.

First full year as a catcher healthy in quite awhile. And first in majors. Without a real backup. Besides, he had to catch Wake--every start.

What isn't covered in "moneyball", and what the statfreaks often ignore--is team chemistry--having a combination of complementary role players. I don't think you just put together a team of high OBP guys. They have to fit your needs, too. Aside from the issue of other skills--defense, speed, etc. For example, the Sox happened on it with the "Dirt Dogs", then lost some of it losing Damon--because they undervalued his "intangibles." Epstein happened on good karma with Bay, VMart and Beltre. And then got rid of it. Would Bay still be a good player in Boston? Hard to say. But I think they had better chemistry with VMart and Beltre. In 2010, they were right in the race until Pedroia and Youks got hurt. And that was with Ortiz and Beckett having off years. Would they have been better this year with VMart and Beltre instead of AdGon and CC? I think so. Kalish would have been up and might not have gotten injured, and they would still have that trio of prospects they gave up for AdGon. They would have been better defensively, and maybe the clubhouse might have been different. And Salty would have had more help with the catching load. Ortiz had an unexpectedly good year, but I don't think they would have missed him if they did not pick up his option, and kept VMart and Beltre. They might even have been able to lower ticket prices--heaven forbid.

Pena--another of those Epstein love interests. They needed special insurance just for him to take fly balls in the outfield.

In the moneyball book, it's about walks walks walks. OBP is really affected by walks--look at Williams, Ruth and Bonds. Guys who got tons of walks--many intentional or semi-intentional. That really boosted their OBP and OPS vs other power hitters. Williams based his top 20 hitters on OPS, in his book that came out in '95. That was about the time Sandy Alderson started preaching OBP and OPS, based on Bill James ideas. Alderson started it as GM in Oakland before Beane. Beane had been a player in Oakland about that time--then converted to the front office. Beane was a highly touted prospect who failed as a hitter because of his hot temper and his tightness (lack of patience) when he was at bat. He also was not dedicated as a player, and failed to improve himself when he was in the minors. Basically, he had a head problem.

Anybody read that "Moneyball" book? About Billy Beane. Reading it right now. The James Bible according to Beane is walks (OBP)are the only important stat for hitters. It is innate--can't be taught. Patience at the plate. Knowing the strike zone. You score runs and make fewer outs when everybody walks. Forget about bunts, stolen bases and the hit-and-run. Never create outs. That explains a lot of the Red Sox philosophy on the field, as practiced by Francona. And why other teams "stole" bases almost at will against Red Sox pitchers. And maybe why the runs were scarce to come by in low scoring games. I don't have a problem with being fussy at the plate, and getting a lot of walks. In fact, in my playing days, I got a lot of walks and was always the leadoff batter. That was before Billy Beane was born. And even before Ted Williams started writing about it. But you got to be able to hit those strikes. And hit them good. That's important,too. Heat strikes, Curve strikes, Change-up strikes, Slider strikes. And hit with some power. That's where slugging % comes in. OPS is the whole package. It's easier when you know what a "good pitch to hit is." But you got to be able to make contact. Good contact. So I don't think walks are the whole story--just an important piece. And then there's playing defense...

Best bingo game I've seen. I don't like country music , either, Salty. But that country kid who sang the National Anthem last night in St Louis sounded good to me. Watching Napoli and Beltre, you wonder where Theo's head was at last pre-season--with his love affairs for Salty and AdGon and CC. Doesn't this guy have a wife?

The story this morning from various sources is the deal is just about done, and will be announced in a day or two. Doesn't include Jackson, which is no surprise--no need there for the Sox. Chances are it will include McNutt and somebody else from the minors, though you can't rule out a 3-way with Lackey. The Chicago papers are saying Ricketts screwed this deal up by announcing Epstein first, before reaching a compensation agreement--as the White Sox did with the Marlins for Guillen. That was not the right protocol, and gave the Sox the advantage. The other mistake was not including any minor league people in the negotiations--Ricketts had only major league people who don't know the minor leaguers the Red Sox were asking for. The Sox are dealing with a poor organization with a poor farm system--which makes it tough. McNutt, for example, would be ranked 15-25, among Red Sox prospects, depending on who you talk to. Meanwhile, all the Globe is interested in is beer. LOL

Chicago newsguy is saying Epstein deal is done. announcement tommorrow. https://twitter.com/#!/thekapman The guess is McNutt or Carpenter.

I hear the deal is done for Epstein to the Cubs--announcement tommorrow. This is from Chicago radio twitter. https://twitter.com/#!/thekapman

Off-topic, I was thinking tonite of the similarities between the Sox-Cardinals 04 World Series and the current one. Except the Cardinals role is now reversed: in 04, the Cardinals were the powerhouse team, and the Red Sox were the hot wild card upstarts who swept the favored Cardinals. This time, the Cardinals are the wild card upstarts, and Texas the favored team. My hunch is the Cardinals will win in 6.

There's a separate thread on this. I just posted there might be a 3-way deal in the works, where the Cubs put up some of Lackey's salary in lieu of any players to the Sox for Epstein. In return, they get Hoyer, too. The Padres get Lackey, and the Red Sox get rid of him paying maybe 1/3 of his remaining salary. 1/3 cash goes to the Padres from the Cubs for Epstein. Red Sox eat 1/3, Padres pay 1/3, Cubs pay 1/3 to Padres. Padres pay net zero for Lackey, give up Hoyer. This one looks too good to work.

I'm hearing a 3-way deal where the Cubs put up some of the Lackey money, and Hoyer goes to Chicago with Epstein. The Sox get rid of Lackey eating maybe 1/3 of salary, the Cubs and the Padres split the rest. The Cubs don't have to give up any players. Epstein is supposed to be brokering this deal. Could be his best one in two years.

Still no resolution out there. I guess Ricketts thinks all that mud the Boston media is piling on the Red Sox will help his chances to get Epstein scott free. But I doubt it--not with Lucchino bargaining. Ricketts apparently is digging his hole deeper, raiding the Padres for their GM, as well. Though the story comes from Heyman, a New Yorker who isn't very reliable. Maybe Selig needs to give new owner Ricketts a few lessons on baseball protocol among owners. I doubt he is making a good first impression. I think the Red Sox should leave Epstein hanging, and move on with Cherington, get a manager and a new coaching staff.

The beer in the dugout thing strikes me as BS. I've seen a million TV games with shots in the Red Sox dugout, and never seen any hint of that. You don't see players drinking from paper cups on the bench. And the active players in the game, coaches, etc, would notice it. I can't imagine players coming into the dugout during a game drinking beer in front of everyone else. That doesn't make sense. Trouble with the media is they just can't quit while they're ahead. They have to overkill.

Hey, no more free booze and fried chicken for the press after games. And no more drinking in the press box during games. Is there any substance to any of these stories? Are "unnamed sources" some clubhouse kid getting favors, or maybe one of Epstein's assistant to his assistants? Is the media trying to damage the Red Sox? You can't say they don't deserve it , at this point. They've been living a charmed life at Fenway for years-- pushing up ticket prices and playing Yankeeball.

Yeah, the Boston press likes to eat its own. Of the course, the way the Globe covers the Jets and the Yankees, you'd think they were owned by a New Yorker. They are, actually. The NY Times. The Herald? Just keepin' up with the competition.