PG: It is. You look and you still have Buchholz back at Triple-A Pawtucket, and he has great stuff. He can go back and learn at Pawtucket rather than go through what guys like Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy and Joba Chamberlain have had to do in New York.

You can tell that the Red Sox have the greatest pitching depth by comparing them to a team that has absolutely no pitching depth? Was it not worth mentioning, say, the Rays or Dbacks as better comps?

You can tell that the Red Sox have the greatest pitching depth by comparing them to a team that has absolutely no pitching depth? Was it not worth mentioning, say, the Rays or Dbacks as better comps?

Maybe Oakland?

Even if the Rays, DBacks, and Oakland has better pitching depth (which I'm not sure they do), the list can be described as "pretty miniscule". Which means Gammons was right. Unless you can come up with lots of teams with better depth.

Even if the Rays, DBacks, and Oakland has better pitching depth (which I'm not sure they do), the list can be described as "pretty miniscule". Which means Gammons was right. Unless you can come up with lots of teams with better depth.

Gammons is right. My point was that he does his argument no service by introducing a team on the opposite side of the spectrum. Why not say, "Here are the Rays and D-backs and A's and Blue Jays, and yet Boston still seems to come out on top in pitching depth?"

Wait... who are these 'Rays' and 'Oakland' and 'DBacks' (what the hell is a DBack?) that you people are talking about? Are those farm teams for the Red Sox and Yankees?

There's nothing wrong with what Gammons did here. He said the Red Sox have great pitching depth, and illustrated by showing they can take a contrasting approach with a player than a team (the Yankees in this case) without such depth.

There's nothing wrong with what Gammons did here. He said the Red Sox have great pitching depth, and illustrated by showing they can take a contrasting approach with a player than a team (the Yankees in this case) without such depth.

The Yankees' depth is on the DL. Stuff happens.

He said the Red Sox have great pitching depth, and illustrated by showing they can take a contrasting approach with a player than a team (the Yankees in this case) without such depth.

So you're saying it was more important to illustrate that having pitching depth is good than to illustrate the point of the question, that Boston's pitching depth is among the best?

There are those who think that Michael Bowden, who is at Double-A right now, is the best of that whole group.

Is this true?

Time to pick nits!

1. Bowden as the best of that group? That reads like a bad Wikipedia entry - "There are those who think"... I'd personally rank him 4th, but a very strong argument exists for 3rd. I don't see the argument for 1 or 2 yet.

2. Lester has higher upside than Beckett?

It is. You look and you still have Buchholz back at Triple-A Pawtucket, and he has great stuff. He can go back and learn at Pawtucket rather than go through what guys like Phil Hughes, Ian Kennedy and Joba Chamberlain have had to do in New York. There are those who think that Michael Bowden, who is at Double-A right now, is the best of that whole group.

I don't understand why this is being parsed so much, but I think the "It is" is his entire answer to the assertion that the list of teams with more depth is pretty miniscule. After answering that question, Gammons goes on to explain why that depth is so valuable to the Red Sox. I don't think he's saying "they are among the deepest because they're deeper than the Yankees!" I think he's saying "yes, they're among the deepest. Now, here's why that matters..."

So you're saying it was more important to illustrate that having pitching depth is good than to illustrate the point of the question, that Boston's pitching depth is among the best?

I'm saying that Peter Gammons can answer the question however the hell he wants. Sure, he could have obeyed your wishes and listed those teams with comparable depth. He chose to show the impact of that pitching depth.

Either way is fine in my book.

Edit: What Jmurph said.

The Yankees' depth is on the DL.

Even healthy, the Yankees don't have the same rotation depth as the Red Sox do.

I'm saying that Peter Gammons can answer the question however the hell he wants. Sure, he could have obeyed your wishes and listed those teams with comparable depth. He chose to show how the impact of that pitching depth.

He could have said, "It is," and then discussed the development of his Sea Monkey collection. All I would be looking for as Joe Reader is for him to address the issue in at least a little depth, rather than make the patently obvious statement that having pitching depth is better than not.

Trust me, if Peter Gammons had any interest in my wishes, he would have quit reporting baseball after his shameless claims to be an "insider" during the '94 Strike revealed him to be a fraud.

...is he dissing Peter Gammons?

He could have said, "It is," and then discussed the development of his Sea Monkey collection. All I would be looking for as Joe Reader is for him to address the issue in at least a little depth, rather than make the patently obvious statement that having pitching depth is better than not.

Actually, it sounds like all you're looking for here as Joe Reader is a reason to complain about Petey. And it took some work, but you found a way.

Actually, all I was trying to do was make a small point, illustrating a way in which I think he would have done the question more service. I have no beef if you're satisfied with the answer. I think it would have been more interesting to see an analysis of organizational pitching depth beyond the Red Sox and Yankees. YMMV.

He said that [Lester] is at about 60 percent of where he is going to be next year and he said that he’s going to be the best left-hander in the American league.

Uh-huh. The chances of him being the best left-hander in just the division are very slim.

I'd probably wait for Lester's K/BB to improve to around 1.75 before I made that claim but that's just me.

The term "pitching depth" is usually meant as some combination of both quantity and quality. While obviously there needs to be some quality cutoff before you consider someone part of a "deep" rotation, seems to me depth should refer to quantity. Gammons is doing that here so no beef with him. More a beef with those of you who somehow didn't list the Cubs among your deep teams. Zambrano, Lilly, Dempster, Marquis, Gallagher, Hill, Leiber, Marshall. That's not a huge amount of quality and we all know the Dempster and Marquis collapses are coming, but it's 8 guys who would have no problem finding ML starting jobs.

I like Gammons, I really do, but no one hypes players the way he does. I don't think he has an agenda, he just gets excited about potential. When I brought up Oakland I was only being mildly snarky as I'm a bit weary of the Red Sox-Yankees universe we seem to live in anymore, but considering the forum, Gammons can't really be criticized for it as those two teams are who the audience he's talking to in this interview cares about.

At the beginning of his sophomore season, Gammons claimed that Shea Hillenbrand was the 3rd best righthanded hitter in the league, after Manny Ramirez and Edgar Martinez. Never mind that Nomar was playing 30 feet to his left, or the other 50-100 better righthanded hitters in the league.

Claims like this make me wonder if the Red Sox will be looking at moving Lester in a trade this summer. If they want to play pump and dump, Gammons will always do his part.

After Sabathia, you think, AROM?

I guess he tired of the "several teams are pursuing Coco Crisp" pass-along.

I'm not betting against Lester. Their is no doubt in my mind his makeup is off the charts, according to every single source this kid has every you mentally need to be a stoper in the rotation. He kicked cancers ass, and I have little doubt he will be among the best pitchers in baseball over some intermediate time frame (not starting now). I was on reccord as saying Lester would blow away his projections this season, and he is on the way to proving me right... then again I was also on record as being long the Padres (also the brewers, cards, d-backs, dodgers and whitesox at various long odds) to win the world series at 28 to 1 comming to the season.

Wait... who are these 'Rays' and 'Oakland' and 'DBacks' (what the hell is a DBack?) that you people are talking about? Are those farm teams for the Red Sox and Yankees?

well, yes.

At the beginning of his sophomore season, Gammons claimed that Shea Hillenbrand was the 3rd best righthanded hitter in the league, after Manny Ramirez and Edgar Martinez. Never mind that Nomar was playing 30 feet to his left, or the other 50-100 better righthanded hitters in the league.

Claims like this make me wonder if the Red Sox will be looking at moving Lester in a trade this summer. If they want to play pump and dump, Gammons will always do his part.

Well, to be fair to Gammons, at least in this case he wasn't citing some anonymous scout's glowing report about Lester, but directly attributing such remarks to Varitek. That's a big improvement for him.

This great Jon Lester we're going to see in the future, he'll stop walking hitters on 4 pitches that don't come within 2 feet of the strike zone just when you think he's getting into a groove?

Claims like this make me wonder if the Red Sox will be looking at moving Lester in a trade this summer. If they want to play pump and dump, Gammons will always do his part.

Blue horseshoe loves Jon Lester.

uh. scott kazmir might argue that point. and david price.

It's a catcher talking about one of the pitchers on his staff. Isn't hyperbole expected?

"After Sabathia, you think, AROM?"

Scott Kazmir's the best lefty in the AL. Might be the best pitcher, probably him, Beckett, or King Felix.

This great Jon Lester we're going to see in the future, he'll stop walking hitters on 4 pitches that don't come within 2 feet of the strike zone just when you think he's getting into a groove?

Maybe you should give him a break for a little. Since May 1st, he's got a 40/15 K/BB in 56.1 IP. That's a 2.4 BB/9. He also has 1 walk in 20.1 IP this month. He's also 9th in the AL in GB% this season.

He's guilty of making up fictional people who think Bowden's the best of the group. Who is he talking about?

Bowden has nice stats, but c'mon.