I should also point out that, considering the injuries we've faced, I'm pretty happy with this season, even if it ends Friday. The Sox tied the Yanks for the division, which is an amazing feat with a $70 mil+ payroll disparity.

Not every acquisition worked out, but they resisted the urge to trade key farm players for a shortterm fix. And we got to see Mike Stanton, Mike Remlinger, and Chad Harville in Boston unis!

I'm putting it on the record that I think this series is going back to Chicago

I'm putting it on the record that I think this series is going back to Chicago

That's a brillaint/insane prediction, if ever I saw one!!!

What annoys me about Trot facing lefties, was his at bat vs. Jenks which was pretty bloody good. Shame we don't have Payton anymore.:)

I love Boston and know they will not give up. You just think that this is one comeback too many, right???

I for one welcome out New White Sox overlords. I think a Sox/Angels series is going to be good for baseball.

If the Astros can hang on, there will be established stars in the NL and big markets in the AL. It's good for baseball.

I think a Sox/Angels series is going to be good for baseball.


It pains me to say this, but I agree. I just don't won't to see our season end in a friggin sweep.

Nixon's made five consecutive starts against LHP. He has one hit in those five starts - a routine pop that Frank Catalanotto lost in the lights. Adam Hyzdu projects significantly better against lefties. Even Grady goddam Little platooned Trot Nixon.

The Red Sox are going to need to figure out how to be helped by mediocre players. Francona did a good job of working Li'l Papi into the mix. However, with guys who could clearly help the team - Youkilis, Petagine, Hyzdu, DiNardo - they haven't gotten their shots. These players don't have so much in the way of upside. They just have skill sets that would help the team. So long as the Sox keep depending on old guys and injury risks, they will need the Adam Hyzdus of the world as backup plans, and they will need to play Adam Hyzdu when his skill set calls for it.

Well Al youd think the boys would be liting segars and dancing the Macaroona but we are as glum as John Ashcroft in a cathouse. The Red Sox have us right where they want us and arent there a few knocked knees as we head out to Bos. I askt Johnny Demon how the Yankees felt last year 1 win away and he got this dusky light in his eyes and kept saying Fear Eats the Soul I got somewhat worried about him Al. There seems to be no parsifal way we can win this series I have figured it six ways to Sunday and we can not win in Fenway games 3 & 4 and then we come back to the Cell and every lidle bit of hope is gone. Things are so bad that Ozzie Guillen held a prayer meeting and called upon St Jude to deliver us and he had Carl Everett light the nine black candles against Boston but they spluttered and went out and Mr. Bloom was heard to say Oy vey ist mir I did not even think he was Jewish Al although Ozzie Guillen says I must say Yarmulke Wearing American.

I was watching an interview of Ken Rosenthal last week and he suggested Francona's job might be in jeopardy.

That's the first I heard that, from anyone.

But I really am not happy with the way he is managing these days. He is sticking with veterans who produced for him in the past but are not producing now and he is letting new players who have a chance to be really good rot on the bench.

I remember Theo made a comment after Tito interviewed for the job: "Is he too nice?"

I'm afraid he might be.

on Nixons deep foul you'd think with 3 friggin guys in the booth one of them could tell me whether it was fair or foul..... still, theyre miles ahead of fox baseball.

I don't know -- I think I'd take McCarver salavating over how hip Jeter is -- or that sexy walk Mo does before he pitches -- over Berman.

At least McCarver comes with Buck and Buck does most of the talking.

Before I turned down the volume last night, I couldn't tell you which was worse -- trailing or listening to those jackasses. (In fairness, Piaza isn't 1/2 bad.)

1) I'm late to this particular party, but I love Jack Keefe's posts. Keep 'em coming, Jack.

2) Ugh, Tito. Dunno if it's niceness, kevin, or what MCA was pointing to, which is super-risk-aversion when it comes to plugging in an unknown quantity in a high-visibility situation. There are damn few managers in history (I can think of only Weaver and Martin) who would bench a guy everybody's heard of in favor of a AAAA-level player who just happens to have a skill that's appropriate for this spot. So what Tito's doing is normal--but that doesn't make it right.

3) Mr. Sunshine predicts we are gonna pound the pi$$ out of Garcia and Garland in Fenway, and then Gaffanino is going to redeem himself in the deciding game back in Chi-town by starting an unassisted triple play in the bottom of the 9th that preserves a 1-0 victory.

But I really am not happy with the way he is managing these days. He is sticking with veterans who produced for him in the past but are not producing now and he is letting new players who have a chance to be really good rot on the bench.

And Hyzdu falls into that category? I think not. He's a bad baseball player, and has a history of being a bad baseball player.

Tito gave Papelbon a highly visible, extremely important role in the pen. I would have liked to see DiNardo on the roster instead of Gonzalez, but you're talking about the 11th pitcher on the staff there. The only thing that really bothers me is the loyalty to Millar this year, but Olerud started last night.

While I think Tito loves "his" guys, I find the proclamations that he never gives young players a chance to be a bit overblown.

It's not that Adam Hyzdu has a chance to be "really good." Petagine either, if the worries about his knees are taken seriously. Or DiNardo, at least not yet.

It's that they're mediocre, which is better than the alternative. Trot Nixon can't hit lefties (career sub-650 OPS). Kevin Millar is struggling. The bullpen sucks and Clement/Schilling are not inspiring confidence. In these situations, mediocrity is good. Mediocrity helps you.

I agree that it's a rare manager who goes to young guys without big upside. In today's game, I'd cite Bobby Cox and Billy Beane (see main board post about Beane as field manager.) But, damn, isn't that what we want?

If the Sox don't do what they did on 03 and 04, then I have to agree with darren, I'm happy with the season given all the injuries, and the fact that at some points the team just seemed FUBAR. Also appealing is the thought of Papelbon, Lester, Sanchez, and Hansen next year, no more KFF, Youks at 1st or 3rd, no more Johnny's throwing arm maybe, Renteria not making 30 errors.

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I'd be Ok seeing Damon in New York for some outrageous contract, maybe next year he'll be worthwhile for them, but I just don't see it in a few years, not w/ that shoulder. Just mean the Sox have to find a CF.

But, damn, isn't that what we want?

Definitely. It's just hard to find. Look at Beane's managerial churning. If he was happy with Macha's use of the available talent, you think he'd have low-balled him?

It'll be real interesting to see who DePo comes up with. Tracy is a guy who actually did give 4-A guys a shot, at least early on. (E.g., he salvaged LoDuca's career for him.)

I think what we're seeing is that the Revolution is proceeding nicely in front offices, but it's a shallow pool of field managers who are both stat-savvy and willing to risk their jobs on sabermetric insights.

Call me crazy and un-sabremetric, but I find the notion of replacing Francona after this season extremely distasteful.

He's not perfect, he makes head-scratching moves on occasion, he bungles his decisions sometimes.

But he won the World Series last year, and managed this team into the playoffs this season despite having no effective Schilling and Foulke for the vast majority of the year. The big picture indicates he did a good job overall. If you fire this guy now, who in their right mind is going to want to take the job?

Yes, his hesitation to go with younger players can be frustrating. I'm not sure it's a fatal flaw, though; Papelbon's use bodes well for the future. Tito puts his confidence in the kids when he has no viable alternatives. Letting Mueller and Millar walk next year means Tito's going to have no problem playing Youks.

The Sox have Tito under contract for 2006 at short money, and have an option on him for 2007 at short money. I don't think he's going anywhere.

OleP, as usual, you nailed it. The question is not whether to keep Tito but whether there is someone out there who is better than Tito and can be had at a cost-effective price. I'm not so sure.

As for the present state of the team, I am happy we made the playoffs. I'd like to see us advance, of course, but I find myself wondering if getting swept by Chicago might be the best thing, long term, for the future of the franchise.

After we lost the 2003 ALCS I posted words to the effect "This is year two of a multi-year plan. The years to come are going to be some of the best years in the history of the franchise."

I continue to believe that. The franchise will be in better shape in 2006 than it was in 2005.

We are down 2-0 to the White Sox, but I say it is a bright sunny morning in Red Sox Nation.

When in doubt, blame the manager.

Tito plays unproven players, just not ALL of them.

Hey, he didn't play Jay Payton that much- does that mean he doesn't like veterans?

Problem ain't Tito.

The Sox tied the Yanks for the division, which is an amazing feat with a $70 mil+ payroll disparity.


Oh come on, that's BS. The Sox had a 4 game lead in the division with less than a month to play, then got their butts kicked by the Jays and Davil Rays. It's all nice and good to cherry pick the stats you want to post in therapy, but a) the Sox lost the division, and thus homefield; b) the Sox play a lot worse on the road; and c) the Sox are down 0-2 after 2 road games. Granted, nothing is over yet.

First, I certainly agree with all of the above that when it comes down to it, Tito is somewhere in the range of average among MLB managers. It's a very small group of men who have the personal and administrative skills to be big league managers. Of them, Tito ain't so bad. He's communicative with his front office and his players, he clearly thinks through every one of his decisions on several levels. I often disagree, but you can do a lot worse than Tito, and many teams do.

I think, though, that the criticism is nonetheless (a) valid regardless of whether Tito should be replaced and (b) able to discern areas of concern.

Obviously Tito plays some unproven players. That insight does very little for me. I see a pattern - not an absolute law, a pattern - of unproven players who appear to have something to offer to the team being passed over. These are usually the sort of unproven players who are not likely to be longterm contributors, but rather playuers who match the team's needs in this moment. When you're embroiled in a playoff race, guys who fit current holes, flawed though they may be, are fundamentally important to short-term success.

That doesn't mean that Ron Johnson should be immediately promoted from Pawtucket. It means that, as a fan, I want the Red Sox to make substantive changes in order that they might win more games and make me, as a fan, happier.

It's also worth noting that we cannot draw clear lines between what is Tito, what is Theo, and what is anyone else. All criticism of Tito is on some level criticism of Theo, who by all accounts is "involved" in day-to-day decision making. They meet all the time.

I continue to believe that. The franchise will be in better shape in 2006 than it was in 2005.

I agree with that, but i would argue that it's partially an effect of the team being in worse shape in 2005 than in 2004. And not because "they went for it in '04", but because of reversible errors. The team chose Renteria and clement/wells over Pedro and a SS. The team failed to assert their proper authority and let Keith Foulke and Curt Schilling throw their seasons away on some misguided Dirtdog play through it mentality. The team chose to waste low-upside but useful talent.

I've been frustrated by the running of this team since the Pedro negotiations, but the problems have been most pronounced since May or so, and I'm very worried that whosoever is in charge of this team doesn't perceive these issues to be problems.

Maybe I'm wrong and it's all been done correctly, or maybe I have misdiagnosed the real problems. But that only mildly tempers my concerns and frustrations. I want this team to win, and I don't like the things that prevent them from winning.

The team chose Renteria and clement/wells over Pedro and a SSPolanco.


Much better...

So Ozzie Guillen got me thinking, and it's a fairly simple question:

Suppose that there were two types of managers, ones who were great with pitching staffs and loved to bunt and steal and do all sorts of bad hitting things, or there were the ones that played for three run homers, but didn't know when to pull starters, or how to leverage the pen?

We'd want type 1 right? It just seems to me that the one place a manager really helps out is with the pitching staff, getting people out at the right times and in at the right ones. I remember Eric Van doing something with John Burkett and slow-hooks in 2003. The point was basically that all his hits were clustered at the end of his games, and any manager with half-a-brain would have gotten Burkett out (which is the real reason the Pedro thing was so awful, we'd seen it for 2 years and then it hurt at the worst time, it would have been some how better had we not known it was coming).

Has anybody done a study of DIPS by manager, to see if managers consistently help their teams DIPS?

This team will be OK in 2006 only if Theo's telephone is disconnected over the winter. Otherwise, his urge to trade for the sake of trading will result in something truly asinine like e.g. losing Manny and Damon and cgaining Cameron and Konerko (who is about 40 OPS+ points lower than Manny lifetime, and only 3 years younger. Also proven pitching mediocrities like Clement and geriatrics like Wells will bre brouight in to block the way of the truly elite pitching staff we are growing. I want to see Papelbon, DiNardo, Delcarmen all playing major roles for the Sox next year, with Hansen and Lester joining at mid-year. Papelbon and DiNardo would be great as starters. In the lineup, I want Youkilis and Pedroia as full-timers, with Hanley joining at mid-season. Youkilis can play 1B if we keep Mueller, as we should; Pedroia can play CF if we keep Graff and lose Damon.

All conjectural; there's lots of upside, but there's also huge downside if Trader Theo gets over-aggressive.

result in something truly asinine like e.g. losing Manny and Damon

Oh please. Damon is declining rapidly in front of our eyes. I'm not sure who his replacement should be, but I do not want Boston to sign him to a long term contract.

In the lineup, I want Youkilis and Pedroia as full-timers, with Hanley joining at mid-season.

Hanley is NOT going to be ready by midseason.

Damon's only 31; it's pretty unlikely he's going into terminal decline, much more likely nagging shoulder injury and general wearing down. I'd sign him for 3-4 years at $8-10mm per but not more. If the commitment gets above $35-40mm, I agree let him walk.

Manny is a JEWEL, and in my view has a better claim for MVP than Ortiz (but alas, A-Rod's is better still.)

I think Jim Callis wrote in one of his ESPN chats that Hanley really needs another 1000 at bats in the minors before he's ready. Even if that is far too pessimistic, he'd need at least one full season and potentially a chunk of another one, putting him in BOS around the 2007 all star break. Maybe the Sox can trade Renteria after 2007 to make room for Hanley at SS, unless they've made him a CF by then.

This team will be OK in 2006 only if Theo's telephone is disconnected over the winter. Otherwise, his urge to trade for the sake of trading will result in something truly asinine like e.g. losing Manny and Damon and cgaining Cameron and Konerko

Which potentially useful player did Theo trade away just for the sake of making a move? Payton: sure, but he had made himself unlivable to his manager and Bradford's a useful bullpen piece. Ambres? Maybe, Graffanino's been an upgrade over Bellhorn and until last night had been a steady presence at 2B.

Damon's a FA so Theo can't trade him.

Big article on the Globe today on Konerko where he states he doesn't like East Coast baseball and will most likely go back to the WS or to a West Coast team. He's from RI but like many Italians there his family was all Yankees fans, so he's got no fond feelings for Boston.

I do not want Manny traded either, because it will be impossible to get fair value for him.

I will be disappointed if they pursue Burnett, who I think is a 6 foor 5 version of Clement with bad tatoos and a lousy attitude.

Just to clarify: I grew up in RI in an Italian-American neighborhood; most of them were Yankees fans because their parents rooted for Joe DiMaggio. Thus my Konerko statements.

Konerko's basically Millar circa 2003, but without the glove. I'll be astounded if the Sox go for him at his price.

(That's not a slight against the White Sox, by the way, who happen to be currently beating the tar out of the Red Sox. It's just that Paul Konerko is not responsible for a particularly large chunk of the White Sox team quality.)

It's just that Paul Konerko is not responsible for a particularly large chunk of the White Sox team quality.

Whaaa? He's easily their best hitter. Without him, their line-up would be nothing.

Konerko's basically Millar circa 2003, but without the glove.

Plus about 10-15 homers a season.

And Konerko's glove has improved dramatically this season. I don't know what he did this past winter, but he's been very good defensively this year.

The thing to watch out for with Konerko is that he's at least partially a product of his ballpark. He slugs about 100 points higher in Comiskey than elsewhere.

He's still a pretty productive hitter on the road, but if he leaves Chicago, whoever signs him won't necessarily get the hitter they're expecting.

You really can't expect more than a 125 OPS+ from Konerko, and while that's nice, it's not all that great for a 1B. If you're going to give him Sexson money, you'd better at least know that he's not likely to be worth it.

Couple points on Konerko - he's easily the Sox most popular player with their fan base. He's also remained very healthy the last several seasons.

I'm not saying...I'm just saying.

I dunno - if the Mets actually offer Manny for Beltran straight up, I take it and let Damon walk. (Anyone who signs Damon to 4 years at a high salary is making a mistake; he'll be an expensive and below-average hitter as a LF/DH by the middle of Year Three.) Use the difference in salary to find a starting pitcher and an inexpensive LF that can rake. He won't rake like Manny of course, but it could still work.

They also need a reasonable right-handed platoon partner for Trot Nixon. That shouldn't be *that* pricey.

It'd be sad to see Mueller gone, but I think unless they're going to trade Youkilis it's time to play him. And we've already seen that Tito will bury Youks unless he has no choice.

Millar needs to go, but that almost goes without saying. I'm not sure Olerud is a viable option given his age. (There seem to be concerns about Konerko on here.)

They're stuck with Renteria. He may yet give the Sox a better season than he did in 2005.

I wonder if the fan base is going to be calling for Graffanino's head on a platter if they lose. He's a perfectly adequate and serviceable utility man and even a starter if things go wrong. Hopefully one of Pedroia or Hanley gets the 2B spot though.

I like post 20 by the Church Father.

John Burkett and slow-hooks in 2003. The point was basically that all his hits were clustered at the end of his games, and any manager with half-a-brain would have gotten Burkett out (which is the real reason the Pedro thing was so awful, we'd seen it for 2 years and then it hurt at the worst time, it would have been some how better had we not known it was coming).


What were Burkett's splits by inning pitched or batter faced? I seem to recall him having a pattern of getting lit up early in the game and then settling down in '03. BTW, did he ever join the PBA?

You can get Burkett's splits by inning and by pitch number at http://sports.espn.go.com/mlbhist/players/splits?statsId=4102&type=pitching&year=2003

Crap, that didn't work.

Look at the splits on ESPN's player car, Anger Mojo's recollections seem to be correct. Burkett would get pounded in the 1st inning and then settle down. He'd then get pounded by the 6th or so.

So, Konerko can play LF then? The Sox might need one.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/4966266

Ramirez eyes new agent for possible trade

Ken Rosenthal / FOXSports.com
Posted: 1 hour ago

Red Sox left fielder Manny Ramirez is seeking a new agent, possibly with the intent of orchestrating a trade out of Boston, FOXSports.com has learned.

Rosenthal then sticks a fork in this year's Red Sox.

http://msn.foxsports.com/mlb/story/4935572

It's difficult seeing Red Sox rallying this time

Ken Rosenthal / FOXSports.com
Posted: 2 hours ago

The Red Sox rallied from a two-games-to-none deficit against the A's in the 2003 Division Series, a three-games-to-none deficit against the Yankees in the 2004 American League Championship Series.

This is different.

I think they should change the "RAMIREZ" on the back of Manny's shirt to "MERCURIAL".

And Rosenthal totally just put a voodoo hex on the White Sox. Thanks a lot.

The correct way to go about the Burkett thing would be to compare his scatter/cluster ratio in the late innings as compared to the early innings. Let's put it this way: maybe Burkett's ERA in the first innings matched his peripherals, but in the late innings his hit rate shot up. This would say that early in the game, he had bad control and wasn't sharp, but later in the game he was tired, clustering his hits together.

I don't know if this is true, but my guess is if managers were better at getting their pitchers out instead of letting them get into trouble first, the h/bip numbers would get better for those starters, and a manager willing to do that is good for his team.

There's of course an innocous reason why ramirez might be looking for a new agent. His old agent quit the business in order to continue to wreck the DBacks.

Whoever is officially Ramirez agent now is probably just some second tier guy from Moorad's office. It seems perfectly reasonable for him to be putting out feelers for some new big name agent just for his normal hand holding representation.

Of course, philly. Manny really wants a new guys now, for when he becomes a free agent three years down the road. Because the new agent has a real incentive to stick with him for three years without getting paid. Gotcha.

Agents generally do more than negotiate one contract.

Manny needs a new agent to have someone handy for when Theo does something crazy. Makes sense to me.

beltran's career OPS+ in 2004 was 111 compared to manny's 156. And there's more $$$ left on Beltran's contract. Why in heaven's name would you swap beltran for Manny?

Manny's the best hitter on the Sox, and likely to remain so (albeit declining slightly) for the remaining 3 years of his contract. After that, if the loony Theo hasn't traded him, he will either retire or may do another $3/30mm. If he's still close to today's level, I'd take it. For the agent, the commission on that is still worth sticking around for.

beltran's career OPS+ in 2004 was 111 compared to manny's 156. And there's more $$$ left on Beltran's contract. Why in heaven's name would you swap beltran for Manny?

First off, speed and defense, two things sorely lacking on this team right now.

Second off, having him on hand obviates any urge to hand Johnny Damon a 4 or 5 year deal.

Third off, Beltran is younger and solves the problem of who plays center field if/when Damon either leaves or is no longer capable of playing CF accpetably. It's a lot easier to find a hitter who can play an acceptable LF (especially if Fenway's your home park) who can hit a ton than someone who can hit who plays an acceptable CF.

The thing that Burkett was reduced to sqeaking by with by the time he reached the Red Sox that I noticed is that he pitched "backwards." That is, he would try to get the batter to chase a borderline offering on a 0-0 count and a 1-0 count, and then try to get the opposition to expand even further if they did. He'd often have to come at people after falling behind 2-0, if he did. It seemed to me that this pattern often would be figured out after a while, and Johnny'd just get hammered. His stuff was basically all gone, and he knew it, when we had him, but every once in a while he had a decent little breaking ball.

km -

you of all posters here should know that career OPS+ is biased toward older players and against younger players - in particular younger players who have been in the majors since they were very young.

Beltran's offensive projection, adjusted for position, is probably (I don't feel like looking up the numbers) something like 20 runs. Maybe more. Then we gotta ask whether the defense and baserunning make up for it. I don't think it's such a crazy idea that Beltran might be better. As of last year, he projected notably better than Manny.

I love Manny. I want him to stay for my own fanboy reasons. I'm not convinced the Sox should never trade him.

As I've said before, the Sox have tried to trade him twice, but both times held off because they wanted more. I'm pretty confident that most any Manny trade would involve young talent on the level of Petit. (I'm pretty confident, then, that it won't happen.)

The Sox tied the Yanks for the division, which is an amazing feat with a $70 mil+ payroll disparity.
.....
Oh come on, that's BS. The Sox had a 4 game lead in the division with less than a month to play, then got their butts kicked by the Jays and Davil Rays.

The Red Sox played at about a 95 win pace the entire year. The Yankees played horribly early, then finished great. Both ended up with 95 wins--one of them did so on a much larger budget. No real debate here. (Sidenote: (From 8/29 on, the Sox were 4-3 against the Jays and 5-2 against Tampa. Real butt-kicking.)


It's all nice and good to cherry pick the stats you want to post in therapy, but a) the Sox lost the division, and thus homefield; b) the Sox play a lot worse on the road; and c) the Sox are down 0-2 after 2 road games. Granted, nothing is over yet.

Cherry pick stats? You mean like judging the Red Sox solely by how they played in the last weeks of the season (not to mention getting the results wrong)?

beltran's career OPS+ in 2004 was 111 compared to manny's 156.

Yes, good idea including numbers from 7-10 years ago when comparing players' future. Manny has clear edge hitting-wise, why include irrelevant info?