FredLynn

The word in the media earlier was that Wheeler would not be offered arbitration. I would not be unhappy to see him return.

Of note: Today is the last day the Sox can offer arbitration to their FAs. Of note is that Wheeler is apparently not going to get that offer. His stats after he came back from from the DL in May are: ERA: 2.54, BAA: .253; OPSa: .567 Why is he not being offered arbitration? He made what: $3m? This is a mistake.

Echo that.

He hasn't been "reduced" to a figurehead; he was ALWAYS a figurehead. He is a charter member of the "I do what I am told to do" club. Francona was President.

Valentine or someone like him is EXACTLY what this team needs right now. Hiring him will serve a purpose: it will change the clubhouse and team philosophy. You can bet there will be no video games and beer in the clubhouse during games; you can bet that the team will be more fundamentally sound that it has been in years; and you can bet that the full offensive arsenal will be used trying to win games. I don't think he is a long term solution because eventually he will grate on people too much. In 2-3 years we can hire another "player's manager" because by then the guys in the dugout will have the proper attitude towards the game. Thats when we will become a relevant team again.

No arguement there. I was just wondering why some of the Japanese pitchers come here with so much hype (and now its Darvish) yet so few succeed. Remember all the hype about DiceK? He turned out to be very very ordinary here.

I would say that Okajima had 2 1/2 good seasons with the team. After June 30 2009 his ERA climbed to 4.61 for the rest of the year, and after that, he stunk. He was decent, but not elite. I can buy Sasaki as being very good though. So thats just three guys out of 34 pitchers who came over who were successful here. I would not eliminate outright the possibility that Darvish could be a positive addition, but I would certainly look on it with a jaundiced eye. Too much hype.

Got those two down. Pretty good overall stats for both. Here is a link to a list of Japanese players, including pitchers, who have made the transition to MLB. I count 34 pitchers on the list, including the two you guys mentioned, and that leaves 32 who were not successful here, overall. I don't really know the reason for this, but it does make me suspicious of hyped up Japanese pitchers making the move: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Japan

About Yu Darvish: after seeing Japanese pitchers come over here and fail one after the other despite lots of hype, I am very suspicious that Darvish is just another overhyped pitcher in the same mold as Matsusaka. Offhand, I cannot think of a single Japanese pitcher who has come over here and been as successful as some of the top pitchers from the US, the Dominican Republic, Mexico etc. Can anyone help me out here and name a truly top tier pitcher who is Japanese?

Lasorda on Valentine: "He's a fiery guy, and that's what you need. You need a guy who can come in there and show them who's boss. You need a guy, who before every game puts on a face of enthusiasm that can be contagious to the team. You've got to have some life as a manager. You can't just sit there." This is our guy folks. RIGHT NOW this team needs this kind of personality. Yes, he will rub all of us the wrong way at some point during the season, but you can bet that he will demand that his team be fundamentally sound and that they are PROFESSIONAL about the way they approach the game. He will not be sitting with his head so far into his spitoon that he can't even see the game, let alone manage it, like our previous manager. He will be involved and he will use the full offensive arsenal at his disposal. And if Cherington tells him to do something against what he thinks maximizes our chances to win, he will stand up to him. Thats probably why Cherington didn't want him as manager-a leftover from the Epstein yes-man regime. Good for you Luccino.....hire him now.

I agree 100%. Furthermore, I would help pay Cherington's fare out of town. He must now know that he is just a marionette in the organization. And BTW: he didn't even get a chance to make a decision. It would not surprise me to see Valentine named manager before he gets back from Central America.

He may not last long. So what? He is the perfect guy to DEMAND compliance with solid baseball fundamentals from this group of spoiled players we now have. Later on may be the time to ease off a bit and hire a more lenient manager; not now. I think he is going to be perfect for the job if he is hired, and I don't much care if he grates on the fans or the media.

He brings the kind of personality to the job that this team needs. He is also the most experienced person being interviewed, I believe.

IMO Valentine is exactly the kind of no-nonsense manager this team needs right now. Does anyone here think that Lackey and Beckett would be playing video games in the clubhouse during ball games with him as manager? If Cherington told him to do something and he thought it would decrease the chance of winning I think he would have the cajones to stand up for what is right.

What is your objection to having Valentine as manager? I think he is exactly what we need.

I don't recall any manager "assigning" any pitcher a number of innings at the beginning of the year except for young pitchers on an innings count. "Assigning" him innings has no meaning because it has no correlation with actual number of innings pitched. In a perfect world if Aceves is the #5 SP and everyone stays healthy all year long you are right: he would toss fewer innings than the #4.

This is also why I focused later in the discussion on number of starts as opposed to just innings because there the relationship between number of starts and position in the rotation is easier to see. Sure. Lets use number of starts. Burnett got more starts than anyone but Sabathia last year; was he their #2 pitcher? Not in my book. Lewis got more starts for the Rangers than anyone but CJ Wilson, yet he was their #5 SP statistically. I think there are two differences of opinion here: first, your statement that if Aceves is named the #4 SP he will certainly get more starts than the #5 SP (and you further assumed good health, which simply almost never happens in the course of the season) and second, you guys are calling the #4 SP the guy who starts the fourth game of the year and I am calling the #4 SP (especially at the end of the season) the guy who performs fourth best.

There is no need for you to tell me what my arguement is. I already know what it is. I don't recall any point this year that Francona told a single media person that "You know what, Lackey will be our #4 starter this year". Thats simply a charade. Your initial statement is simply not true. Penciling in Aceves as our #4 SP (whatever that means to you) in no way guarantees that he will get more starts and innings than our number 5. What if he gets injured or fails to perform? Isn't it possible (likely, I would say) that if he were the #5 and the so-called #2 got injured he would get more innings than the #2 SP? I showed you that already, if you believe that the order of the SP is performance based. The initial statement you made about Aceves is inherently illogical. Its hard for me to believe that you cannot see that this is true.

Again, the post below is the one I initially commented on as being inaccurate. No, I don't want to go on with this, really. Its a difference in how we view ranking our SP. I do not view Lackey as our #4 SP last year, for example. He was the worst SP in MLB: I don't think you could pencil Aceves in as your #4 because you will automatically be assigning him more innings than he would pitch from the #5 hole.

I don't think you could pencil Aceves in as your #4 because you will automatically be assigning him more innings than he would pitch from the #5 hole. This is where all of this began. Just because you call Aceves the #5 guy does NOT mean that he will get fewer innings than the #4 guy...or the #2 guy..or anyone else. His innings will be determined by many factors, the most important being health and effectiveness. THIS is what I disagreed with initially. We are losing sight of the reason for the discussion IMO.

OK; you don't like ERA as a criteria. Do the analysis with another stat.