Not enough beer and fried chicken.

Just to clarify that it's not Pedro being quoted, from TFA:

Buck Martinez, who caught in the majors for 17 years, managed the Blue Jays, and is now a broadcaster, feels a catcher can make a difference with a staff.

The Red Sox should trade Xander Bogaerts for Kurt Suzuki. If Kurt can reduce the staff ERA by half a run per game, he'd be a perennial 10 WAR player!

"The Red Sox may have enough money to buy the whole league, but they don't have the money to buy video to put into my video machine"

--NTR Pedro Martinez

The guy who's struggling the most, Buchholz, is the guy who refused to pitch to Varitek.

Is this the same Buck Martinez who said Brett Lowrie has more ability than George Brett?

How does he know all this about Varitek? Are the pitchers saying that is the difference this year? Haven't heard that.

I really think that the advance scouts and coaches work this stuff out before each series and have meetings with the pitchers. Hard to believe there are too many secrets about how to pitch big league hitters. Must come down to ability vs. ability. At the major league level pitchers call their own game and assume the responsibility for pitch selection.

The guy who's struggling the most, Buchholz, is the guy who refused to pitch to Varitek.

Are you thinking of a different pitcher? And a different catcher? Besides the fact that Varitek did catch for Buchholz on at least one occasion last year (I didn't see any reason to look beyond one April start the two were a battery), I find it hard to believe that a pitcher would have qualms about throwing to a backstop who was behind the plate when the guy threw a no-hitter in his second big-league start.

At the major league level pitchers call their own game and assume the responsibility for pitch selection

I don't think that is always true. I know on the White Sox under Ozzie that often pitch selections came from the dugout. Now with Ventura that has mostly stopped but the Sox pitchers, including Humber during his perfect game, are often quoted as "AJ threw down the signs and I just followed his plan".

I'm pretty sure while most pichers call their own games, it varies from pitcher to pitcher, team to team, and is certainly not "always up to the pitcher".

Because the Red Sox suck. QED.

"Always up to the pitcher" in the sense that he has final say. Catcher puts down the signs for how they are supposed to work the batter. Pitcher can shake off signs.

We don't get stories anymore that talk about how it was the catcher's fault that the pitcher threw too many fastballs or the like. Sometimes the manager may send in a certain pitch call but he generally doesn't want the onus on him if the batter hits a bomb, either. Post-game interviews now seem to be "well, he hit a good pitch." or "I didn't get the ball where I wanted it."

Yogi Berra was interviewed by Charlie Rose last week, and he recounted a brief story about a game where he was catching Whitey Ford during one of Ford's rare off days. According to Yogi, the first four guys all got base hits, jumping on Ford early in the count. Stengal comes out to the mound, and asks Yogi if Ford has good stuff today.

Berra, without missing a beat, says, "I don't know. I haven't caught one of his pitches yet."

I bring this up because, at its core, a catcher can call for a cut fastball, and if it's Mariano Rivera throwing it, you're probably going to get the hitter out, and if it's John Lackey, the hitter's got a pretty good chance of making contact. The problem with the Red Sox this year, in a nutshell, is that they've had too many games where their starter has been hittable, and while the team is one of the most highest-scoring teams in baseball so far, their runs have come in feast-or-famine format. No team has more games with double-digit runs scored than the Sox, which is makes their RS/RA ratio - which is currently positive for the season - look like that of a winning team.

Are you thinking of a different pitcher? And a different catcher? Besides the fact that Varitek did catch for Buchholz on at least one occasion last year (I didn't see any reason to look beyond one April start the two were a battery), I find it hard to believe that a pitcher would have qualms about throwing to a backstop who was behind the plate when the guy threw a no-hitter in his second big-league start.

I can't seem to find the article, but, I remember when Victor Martinez first came to the Red Sox and caught a lot, there was a lot of talk about pitchers preferring Varitek, based on his reputation. Buchholz went out of his way to praise the job that Martinez was doing, especially how confidently he would call the pitches, it made Buchholz confident in the pitches he was throwing (paraphrasing... I really wish I could find the quote).

It made sense, because I paid more attention to how Martinez called the pitches after reading it... and there was a certain confidence to the way he would call the pitches.

there was a certain confidence to the way he would call the pitches

What does that even mean?

What does that even mean?

I'm trying to think of a better way to explain it. Like, when he threw down the signs, he seemed very sure of himself, like that was the pitch to throw.

There's a lot of distance between "Buchholz refused to throw to Varitek" and "Buchholz like the way that Martinez threw down signs."

I just can't understand why a backup catcher who lasted 18 years with a 73 OPS+ would be pushing the "on-field general is the secret weapon" premise.

Lesson #1 learned from listening to Buck Martinez: If you have a right-handed son, teach him to be a catcher.

Lesson #1 learned from watching Paul Assenmacher, Mike Myers, Jesse Orosco, and countless other LOOGYs: If you have a left-handed son, teach him to be a pitcher.