The Dombrowski Era Begins

*Here's another old one I never posted. Some of it holds up pretty well (predicting the need to trade 2 of 4 top prospects to get a stud pitcher in Sale because the roster as a whole wasn't good enough) and some doesn't (Kimbrel has been great still). But I do think it's a good evaluation of Dombrowski and while the team has won 2 division titles, the future looks super murky and I doubt Ditching Dave would stay through a rebuild. It is also probably an unfinished post, but oh well. Tupac and Biggie both put out plenty of unfinished shit.

Let's get this out of the way: Craig Kimbrel is really fucking good. Historically good. In Major League history, he has the second highest strikeout per nine inning rate (14.55) of any pitcher with at least 300 career innings (behind only Aroldis Chapman). 2015, his only season with the Padres, was his worst (more on this later) in his career. His numbers? 2.58 ERA, 39 saves, 87 strikeouts in just 59 and a third innings. That is just 4 fewer strikeouts than Mark Buehrle had in 139 and a third more innings. He is a 4 time All-Star in just 6 seasons and he has deserved each nomination.

He also fills a hole on this Red Sox team. The Red Sox in 2015 had the 13th best bullpen ERA in the American League. Beyond Koji Uehara (who will now pitch the 8th inning), the bullpen was an unreliable disaster for most of the year. Even the usually strong Junichi Tazawa struggled at the end of the year, with a 9.22 ERA from August until the end of his season. There is overwhelming evidence that all but the best starting pitchers shouldn't really pitch to a lineup for more than 2 times through the order, which means that bullpens these days really need to be ready to throw 4 innings a game quite often. The teams with the 3 best bullpen ERA last year were the Pirates, Royals and Cardinals and they all did prettay prettay good last year.

So in a vacuum, adding one of the best relief pitchers of all time to a crappy bullpen is a strong move that will make the team better in 2015. But anyone who has ever seen Total Recall knows, living in a vacuum can make your head explode when you poke hole in it. Unfortunately, in this case there are plenty of holes.

Dave Dombrowski was hired by the Red Sox to be bold and turn around a franchise that finished last in the AL East 3 out of the last 4 years (I can't remember what happened in that other year though, nobody really seems to ever talk about it). With a reputation for making big deals and using his farm system for trade bait rather than for growth, we all knew a handful of prospects would be shipped out this offseason. And back in the safe confines of our vacuum, this is a totally fine and actually smart strategy.

Over the last 5 years, Ben Cherington and the front office built up the best farm system in baseball. It had stars and depth. It had talent in the high and low minors. It had up the middle talent. It had pitching and hitting. There was power and speed and defense. Including players under 25 years old on the Major League roster who no longer qualify as prospects, there were 20 players with a strong chance to become Major League regulars or better or way better. There was never going to be enough room for all of them and some should definitely be used for a trade. One of the biggest knocks on Cherington was that he tended to hoard prospects to the point where they lost their value, and in players like Garin Cecchini, Matt Barnes, Allen Webster, Ryan Lavarnway and Anthony Ranaudo, you can see where people got this idea.

If you asked me what players from the farm would be great to use as trade trips this offseason I would have started with Manuel Margot and Javier Guerra. They play the same positions, center field and short stop, respectively, as the team's two best players. They are 2-3 years away from big league ready. They have short track records of success. Their prospect status is built mostly on their defense and athleticism, which I feel like can lead to more failure and variability in prospect evaluation. They are great prospects, but we also have 4 other prospects I like a lot more (Yoan Moncada, Andrew Benintendi, Rafael Devers, Anderson Espinoza). So the fact that they will be in another organization next year is not a problem to me. I have no emotional attachment to these teenage boys. I have even less attachment to Carlos Asuaje and Logan Allen (though I think he is a great lottery ticket and would have liked to have seen him in the system for just one more year).

What I am having a really hard time wrapping my head around is why Dombrowski felt the need to trade all 4 of these prospects for a 60 inning reliever. There seem to be 4 common arguments in support of the move, which I will address below.

The Sox bullpen sucked and they needed to add a great closer to it to make it better
I already agreed with the first part of this and I don't disagree with all of the second part. I think the team could have added any great reliever, closer or not, and it would make an impact on this bullpen. With teams like Kansas City and New York having dominant 8 and 9 inning guys, it seems like a great strategy. A recent article by Jeff Sullivan of FanGraphs (number heavy) determined that having a truly elite reliever at the back of the bullpen may be worth more than what we capture with Wins Above Replacement, and it makes sense. But his second to last paragraph is where I really have concern with this trade:

All of this is looking back. This is reflecting on relievers who were elite. When it comes to team-building, the tricky thing is trying to identify elite relief ahead of time. Of course, Aroldis Chapman looks amazing. Andrew Miller. Wade Davis. And so on. But we’ve long understood that relievers can be particularly volatile, and as an example, a qualifying elite 2014 reliever was Greg Holland. Also Jake McGee.Craig Kimbrel had his ups and downs. Koji Uehara was more vulnerable in 2014 than he was in 2013. Joe Nathan was a hell of a lot worse in 2014 than he was in 2013. Like with any player, when you acquire a good reliever, you’re acquiring present talent, but talent can fade, and injuries can happen at almost any moment. No one has ever been or will ever be a guarantee.

Kimbrel is even called out as an example. He has been un-fucking-believable in the past, but how do we know if that will continue? Relievers have short terms of dominance, typically, so even with recent histories of success it can be fleeting.

Just look at the Red Sox of recent years. Before 2012, they traded starting caliber short stop Jed Lowrie for Houston's closer, Mark Melancon. Melancon was terrible with the Sox, so they shipped him to Pittsburgh where he has revived his career. Volatile. Before 2013, they traded starting right fielder Josh Reddick to Oakland for All Star closer Andrew Bailey. Bailey was injured and ineffective most of the year and his career is on life support.

On the flip side, the Sox have found great bullpen pieces off the relative scrap heap from 2011-2014. Their best 3 relievers over that time were Uehara, Tazawa and Andrew Miller. Uehara was an older reliever signed for $9 million over two years and expected to be in the mix for the 7th inning. Tazawa was signed out of Japan as a young starting prospect, failed to develop in the minors, and converted to the bullpen before coming to Boston. Miller was a high draft pick of Dombrowski, traded to Miami, released, then after he came to Boston, was converted to relief.

What I am trying to show is that I do believe a dominant 8th and/or 9th inning guy is important. However, there are a lot of ways to acquire one and trading a buttload of prospects for one may not be the best option because of how volatile even the best relievers can be.

Dombrowski and the front office identified Kimbrel as the best available option and went out and got him
This is basically the "But I want it!" argument. I can appreciate that Dombrowski knows way more about baseball than I ever will, so if he thinks Kimbrel will continue to be great then I will give him some benefit of the doubt. I will also concede that it is great to have someone who can be decisive and execute their plan. But if I want an ice cold Budweiser after a long hard day in the internet and a bartender tries to charge me $100 for it, I will take my business elsewhere.

The free market dictates price. The Padres evidently set the price for Kimbrel at 2 top 50 prospects, a lottery ticket, and a depth piece. At this point, it is up to Dombrowski to say, no thank you, I will go sign Darren O'Day and see what happens when I convert Joe Kelly and maybe I will get similar results. Kimbrel was not the only solution to this problem, but Dombrowski acted as if he had to have him at pretty much all costs. This type of behavior almost always leads to buyers remorse.

The Sox have such a great, deep farm system, they can afford to overpay
I just don't understand this argument. Just because you have a lot of something doesn't mean you should just be comfortable giving it away because you can. Like, Donald Trump doesn't go to 7-11 to buy a Big Gulp for $6,000 just because he has all that hard earned (inherited) money. No, when Donald Trump goes to 7-11, he pays $1.99 for a Big Gulp like the rest of us.

Now, Craig Kimbrel is a more scarce resource than a Big Gulp, sure, but just because the Sox have a shit load of prospects that doesn't mean they should be comfortable giving away a lot of them to get him. Each prospect brings with him his own value. If you spend that value on Kimbrel, that is value you can't spend on another player.

Some people have made the argument that they should have traded these 4 prospects for an Ace like Sonny Gray or Chris Sale. I think it's very clear that Dombrowski explored this option and was told that at this time those pitchers are not available, at least for this package. But who knows if they would be 3 months from now once rosters have shaken out. Or maybe they would be at the 2016 trade deadline if either team decides to start a rebuild. Well, now that the Sox have traded these prospects, it would likely take more than one of their top 4 prospects to get the job done.

One of the great things Danny Ainge and the Celtics have done is to maintain their flexibility for when a superstar becomes available. Dombrowski just diminished his prospect bank account because he could and if a higher impact player becomes available, he may not have the assets to get in the running.

The bullpen is all set after this deal, now they can just go sign one of the 3 Ace pitchers
This is a really risky strategy. There is no guarantee any of the 3 Aces want to come to Boston. Zack Greinke has a really good situation in LA. David Price has gone on record as saying he doesn't like Boston because the way the fans treated him when he was with Tampa (nice work gang!). Johnny Cueto seems like he might be open to coming here, but he also carries the most risk of the 3. Unfortunately, by giving up so many good prospects this early in the offseason, they have really locked into this strategy. As we saw with Jon Lester last season, there are no sure things in Free Agency.

Yoan and Isaiah

Talent.

That is what the Celtics and Red Sox added in the last few days. That is generally what wins out in the end in sports. That is what we pay to see.

With the additions of Isaiah Thomas and Yoan Moncada, the Celtics and Red Sox, respectively, added two talented players to their organizations. We will take a look at each move individually, but the key here is that both teams improved their talent base without giving up much to do so.

Isaiah Thomas

Nick Van Exel 2.0. Lil' Jason Terry. Rich man's Nate Robinson. These are all comparisons I have read for Thomas since he was traded to the Celtics last Thursday. This translates to a scoring guard with an attack mentality. A man with big talent, even bigger balls and a small body. A man with such big balls and such a small body it's a wonder the forces of gravity don't just suck him earthbound.

The Celtics traded 2 months of Marcus Thornton (who's contract is up after this year) and a 2016 1st round pick from Cleveland (that would likely be in the mid 20's as long as Lebron is around) for the next three years of Thomas. Thomas is only 26 years old and he is signed to one of the best contracts in basketball, one that actually declines over the life of the deal.

Thomas is unlike anyone the Celtics have right now or really have had since they traded Paul Pierce. Brad Stevens' motion offense is a thing of beauty. It's great for a team that does not have a go to scorer. It's all about ball movement and is very Spursian. Unfortunately, in the 4th quarter, without a go-to scorer the offense stagnates. Thomas changes all of that. He wants the ball in his hands when the clock is winding down. And unlike Evan Turner, he can actually do something with it.

In his two games in green so far, he has averaged 21 points and 5 assists (against 4.5 turnovers...yikes). I watched him in the second half of the Phoenix game and I am very impressed so far. He's the only player on the team that can dribble (I had nightmares last night of Jae Crowder running the fast break). He throws some very cool passes (some a little too cool as evidenced by all the turnovers). He looks to be a good mid range shooter and a pretty good 3 point shooter. He can get absolutely anywhere he wants on the floor. He is somehow an amazing finisher despite standing only 5'9". He gives James Young a friend in the left handers club. He's also got an energy and attitude that the club was sorely lacking (sorry Kelly Olynyk, your lady hair and cankles were never going to be the heart and soul of this club). He also sucks on defense, but let's ignore that for now.

It seems like the major complaint from the fans and media surrounding the deal is that adding talent and trading away a draft pick runs counter to what Danny Ainge has been doing the last two seasons. I disagree. Ainge has been collecting assets since he stole the Nets lunch money in the Pierce-Garnett deal. With those assets, the goal was to maintain flexibility for an opportunity to present itself. If the team could be bad enough to land a top 5 pick, he would pursue that path as he did last year. If he was able to turn a trade exception into a first round pick and a talented young player like Tyler Zeller, he would pursue that even if it made the team better. If a superstar became available, he could trade for him.

In the case of Isaiah Thomas, the Celtics did not land a superstar, but they did land a good player who can help the team in the future. They did not give up much to get him and his salary going forward helps the team maintain flexibility. Thomas is yet another asset on a team full of them. He could be our sixth man and go-to scorer for the next three years, but he could also be the sweetener in a trade for a superstar. He makes the team better this year, but he doesn't guarantee them a playoff spot especially with the other 7-8 seed contenders improving at the deadline.

The reality is that there are 4 teams definitely worse than the Celtics (Lakers, Knicks, Sixers, T'Wolves) that the team was never going to catch at the bottom of the standings. They are also probably better than the Magic and, because of the difficulty of the West, the Kings, Nuggets and Jazz. No matter what the team did there was a strong likelihood they weren't going to finish worse than 9th. So if they add a player who is going to help the team for the future but it drops them to the 11th pick, I'd say it's a pretty strong move. I've been as guilty as anyone the last two years worrying about draft position, but I think with the top 3 out of reach it's time to stop worrying.

The NBA has been much more of a crap shoot lately. With freshman dominating the lottery, it seems like the variability of a prospects future is larger than ever. While the top 2 or 3 picks still hold tremendous value, the value of, say, 4-14 seems to be much more blurry. The 2013 draft, which was supposed to be a bad draft but has turned out pretty solid, contains a ton of talent drafted outside of the top 10 including Kelly Olynyk, Dennis Schroeder, Giannis Atentokoumpo (this is not the way to spell his name, sorry), Shabazz Muhammad, Michael Carter-Williams, Gorgui Dieng, Mason Plumlee, and the possible best player of the draft Rudy Gobert (who was drafted at 27). If you played a series with those players against the players picked in the top 10 (including bust number 1 Anthony Bennett), the not-top-10 would win.

Adding Isaiah Thomas may hurt the draft position, but he does not hurt their chance to build a championship contender. The number one pick in the 2015 draft is not walking through that door with or without IT. Enjoy the swagger, the left hand, the nifty layups, the big grin, and most of all, the giant balls. Balls.

Yoan Moncada

It may not seem like it, but $63 million for a player who could be the number 1 pick in the draft is a steal. Major League Baseball (and all team sports) artificially deflate the value of amateur talent through the draft (and now international signing bonus restrictions). The only way for a top US amateur to play professionally is to submit himself to the draft. When that player is drafted, he can either sign with the team that drafted him (not of his choice) for more or less the amount dictated by the league based on his draft slot, or refuse to sign and wait a year to be drafted again and start the process all over again in perpetuity (I won't turn this article into an abolish the draft piece, you can get that here: Abolish The Draft). The only team that can get the top player in the draft, the next Stephen Strasburg or Bryce Harper, is the team with the worst record. So when a player good enough and young enough to be selected first overall is a free agent, the open market dictates the player's value rather than the penny pinching billionaires who don't want to share their wealth with teenagers. Going to $31.5 million is certainly unprecedented, but when you consider the skill set it makes a lot of sense.

A brief summary of scouting reports on Moncada that I've read around the internet. He plays short stop in Cuba, but at his current size and agility profile he projects to be a more natural 3B or 2B. He's a switch hitter who projects better from the left side (Keith Law said his hitting from the right side is a little rigid). He's very strong and fast and physically imposing in person. He's got good hand-eye coordination so he could hit for a high average. He could be a 20 homer-20 steal type player with the ability to hit over 30 homers if he reaches his potential. Some scouts say he could be the number 1 pick and a superstar, others say he is a 1st rounder that projects as above average. He should take a year or two in the minors to get used to US ball. He's not a sure thing, nobody is at 19, but he's a very very good prospect and is now one of the top 20 in all of baseball.

The beauty is that all the Red Sox had to give up to get him is money. They didn't have to trade away their top major league talent for a top prospect like the Cubs did last year with Jeff Samardzija (spelled that right on the first try!). They didn't have to trade away all of their major league talent to be the worst team in baseball for three years like the Astros did. They just went out and signed the guy. Yes it was a lot of money and yes he could be a total bust, but it's only money and it doesn't even count against the luxury tax line, if that means anything to the team still. The cherry on top is that the next highest bidder was the Yankees and they need Moncada a lot more than the Sox do!

For their money they get a 19 year old prospect who should move quickly through the minors and can play multiple positions. You may have noticed that all of the positions he can play already go about 2 deep at the major league level, but 2 years from now who knows what the team will look like. Maybe Mookie Betts or Xander Bogaerts are traded for pitching (please, please no). Maybe Pablo Sandoval or Hanley Ramirez have to or can move to first base. Maybe Dustin Pedroia's body breaks down to the point where he is a backup or has to be traded to the weaker National League (the Phillies just traded Jimmy Rollins, their former MVP and career hits leader so it's not impossible). Maybe Moncada is traded for pitching or is a bust. The point is, no team ever lost a championship for having too much talent.

There are no real downsides to this signing. That $63 mil is money the team could spend elsewhere, but it likely would have been spent on a player over 30 on the downside of his career. The team can't give out bonuses to international prospects over $300k for the next two years, but that was the case even before the Moncada signing because they already went way over their league imposed budget. Those are the only two downsides, nothing else.

We don't know what will become of Moncada, but the upside is ridiculous and that is all that matters here.

THAT'S SO RANDOM

• Quick story on Isaiah Thomas that the non-sports fans should enjoy. If his name sounds familiar it is because there was a Hall of Fame point guard that played for the Pistons in the 80's and 90's named Isiah Thomas (spelled differently). The Pistons were the most hated team in basketball and were called the "Bad Boys". They were massive douchebags and Isiah was the applicator (do douchebags have applicators?). Any way, our Isaiah's father, James, grew up in California and was a die-hard Lakers fan. The Lakers had defeated the Pistons in the 1988 Finals and were set to face them again in 1989. James made a bet with a friend that his Lakers would win, but if they lost he had to name his son, you guessed it, Isaiah. Hopefully through some deductive reasoning you can figure out who won the '89 Finals. I'm glad my father never made a bet about the Celtics-Lakers so I didn't end up being named Kareem Abdul-Bergeron.
• Tonight is the series finale of Parks and Recreation. Nothing funny to say about it, just remember to watch it. If I'm not too emotionally decimated after watching it, I will do a review of the whole series tomorrow.
• I didn't live Tweet the Oscars this weekend, but I have a few thoughts to share:
• I'm pissed that Michael Keaton didn't win Best Actor. Even if it would have felt a little like a "Lifetime Achievement Award", he was awesome in Birdman and he is fucking Batman. The dude who played Stephen Hawking did an impression for two hours. That should get you cast in SNL, not an Oscar. I think actors doing biopics should be ineligible for Oscars, otherwise give guys like Jay Pharoah the award for his impression of Denzel.
• I'm also bummed that Rosamund Pike didn't win Best Actress even though I really like Julianne Moore. If you haven't seen Gone Girl you should really check it out. MINOR SPOILER ALERT Not that I would ever cheat on Sarah, but if you watch this movie and Rosamund's performance and still think it's a good idea to cheat on someone, well you deserve what is coming to you.
• It's rare that one person can claim the two creepiest moments of the night, but god damn it John Travolta did it. His thetan count must have been extra high that night. He must have been channeling the spirit of Bill Cosby. That was the best work he has done since Broken Arrow. Congratulations to John.
• I can't tell if this new Lady Gaga schtick is more annoying than her old schtick or they are equally awful. I'm just glad she let Tony Bennett rest for a night.
• No better place than a 4 hour mutual masturbation fest to address all the world's ills. Racism is now over, immigration is solved, and 150 million women just got a pay raise today! Thanks actors!
• Was scrolling through the guide on my TV and noticed a Rosie O'Donnell standup special. I didn't watch it, but it reminded me of my favorite joke in Chappelle Show history: during the "Player Haters Ball" they show pictures of celebrities for the player haters to hate on. When they get to a picture of Rosie, Chappelle's character says "She wears underwear with dick holes in em."
• My show recommendation of the week is Better Call Saul. If you watched Breaking Bad you should already know about this show and already be watching it. Even if you did't watch Breaking Bad you could watch this show and be fine. It's funnier than it's predecessor and it has started off really strong. It will never reach the heights of Breaking Bad just because that show was one of the best 5 or so in history, but it has started off stronger than BB. In case you forgot, that show started off pretty slowly. It had good acting but not a lot happened right off the bat and it wasn't even a lock to go beyond one season. If Better Call Saul can be half the show it's fore-father was, then we are all lucky. 
• Finally, because it is the series finale of Parks and Recreation, here is "5000 Candles in the Wind" by Mouse Rat:

Avoid James Shields

Sources are saying that James Shields will sign with a team by the end of this week. There are no specific teams rumored right now, but word is that he has multiple offers and he plans to choose one. The Red Sox may or may not be one of those teams, but given the dollars and years he is expected to sign for, I hope the team stays away.

I've already covered the new additions the team has made. They have not acquired an "ace" in the purest sense of the term, but they have a breakout candidate in Rick Porcello and enough depth, including their Triple A starters, that the rotation should be at least average. Recent projections from FanGraphs show that they think the Sox will have the 5th best rotation in all baseball because of this depth. 5th best may be a stretch given the uncertainty surrounding each starter, but it shows that the rotation is much healthier than the greater public (especially the geniuses in the Boston media) realize. This overall health is just the first reason the team should bow out of the sweepstakes.

The second reason is his age combined with the miles on his arm. 33 is really starting to push it when you are talking about most starting pitchers. Guys like Justin Verlander, CC Sabathia, Dan Haren, Matt Morris, Jason Schmidt, even Pedro Martinez all started to drop off in their early 30s. Most of these guys were poster boys for durability until then. A lot of them were out of the league before they even hit 35. The years of throwing a lot of innings finally caught up to them and their bodies broke down. Very few pitchers remain effective into their late 30s and most of those guys are Hall of Famers, knuckleballers or soft-tossing lefties. Shields is none of those.

The last reason is that I question how good Shields really is. He strikes out a decent amount of guys and limits walks and home runs. But a lot of his value is tied up in his durability, which may soon disappear. He has also played in two serious pitching parks in his career so the home run limiting may be a mirage. Finally, the last two seasons he has played in front of some great defenses in Kansas City. All of this doesn't mean he isn't a good pitcher, but I wonder if it is covering up his actual level of talent.

Despite the rhyme scheme, Big Game James has been an inaccurate nickname, especially lately. In 60 career post season innings, his walks, hits and home runs go up while his strikeouts go down. This all leads to an ERA that is almost 2 full runs higher than his regular season ERA. Now, lots of pitchers pitch worse in the post season when the competition is tougher, but Shields has literally made a name for himself as someone who steps up when it counts. 60 innings are not much, but I am curious if it shows that his actual talent level is something less than what we see over a long season/career. In the post season, durability, Shields' chief skill, goes out the window. Talent is often the best predictor of future success so if he's not as talented as we think, then the future wouldn't be bright.

Look, in 2015 I expect Shields to be better than every pitcher on this team besides Porcello (can you tell I'm excited for Pretty Ricky?). At 33, his best years might be behind him but he is still a very effective pitcher. His strikeout to walk ratio was 17th in baseball last year (and better than anyone on the roster right now). He was 5th in innings pitched and has been equally durable for the last 8 years. FanGraphs projects him to be worth 3 WAR, which would tie him for the team lead with Pretty Ricky. For the right price, Shields would be a great addition to the team in 2015.

The problem is, we likely aren't talking about a 1 year pillow deal like they used to land Adrian Beltre after a down season in a pitcher's park. Shields is coming off a strong year in 2014 so he doen't need to rebuild his value. He has pitched in pitcher's parks his whole career so going to a hitter's park is likely to hurt his numbers. At 33 this is probably his last chance to get a long term deal so you can bet he is going to find one. Every player in baseball is valuable at the right price (besides Ryan Howard), but Shields is definitely going to exceed the price I am comfortable with.

WARNING: NUMBERS TO FOLLOW, IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE HOW THE SAUSAGE IS MADE SKIP AHEAD TO THE BOLDED TYPE

A quick and dirty way to calculate how much a player is worth is to figure out how many wins they are worth over the life of a contract and multiply it by how much money teams are paying per win (basically take the total payroll of all teams and divide it by the total number of wins in the whole league). We know what Shields is expected to produce in 2015 (3 WAR) and that the league values wins at about $7 million right now. To figure out each subsequent year we basically take away a half win to account for age decline and we increase the value of a win about $0.5 million due to recent trends.

In this scenario, Shields will produce 3, 2.5, 2, 1.5 and 1 win over the next 5 years for a total of 10 wins. Each season, the win will cost $7MM, $7.5MM, $8MM, $8.5MM, $9MM. When you multiply the seasonal wins by the value of a win, you get Shields' rough monetary value each season (I rounded up to give him the benefit of the doubt):

2015: $21 million

2016: $19 million

2017: $16 million

2018: $13 million

2019: $9 million

Based on these calculations, I would feel comfortable giving Shields a contract worth $78 million over 5 years or $69 million over 4 years. Given the chatter this offseason, though, I expect him to exceed this. So please, Red Sox, stay away.

THAT'S SO RANDOM

• Got to see a little bit of the Patriots' parade today. Had a great vantage point from the front of my building. Two things: first, so happy that the state decides cleaning the streets for people to get to work isn't important, but cleaning it for a bunch of people playing hookie to yell at a bunch of 250 pound millionaires is important. I'm sure Bob Kraft paid for the overtime for the removal too. The second thing: Tom Brady is seriously handsome up close.
• I've seen more and more previews for Will Smith's new movie, Focus. It's hard to tell whether or not it will be good based on the trailer, but it looks like it could be really good or really bad. As a super fan, I really want, no need, it to be good. I stuck with Ben Affleck through Gigli and Jersey Girl, and I have tried to stick with Will through his recent shitty stretch. Don't let me down Will, please.
• One indication that the movie might be bad is the use of one of my least favorite phrases: "there are two types of people in this world..." In this movie he says something like you are either a hammer or a nail, which makes no god damn sense. It's something screen writers use to be deep or to set up some future showdown. Rather than just go with good/evil, they use it  to more clearly separate groups of characters. Fucking stop. People are smart enough to pick up differences in characters and understand why they are at odds during the climax. Saying "there are two types of people in this world" makes your character sound like a moron. There are at least 3 types.
• Last year I made a New Year's resolution to learn one new thing a day. The best source of these nuggets was an email newsletter called "Now I Know" by Dan Lewis. He writes a few paragraphs on some random fact and tells really interesting stories. For instance, did you know Winston Churchill was the first person ever recorded using the term "OMG"? Or that the reason McDonald's has never sold hot dogs is because the founder Ray Kroc said "there's no telling what's inside a hot dog's skin?" It's sent out every day and it's a lot of cool, interesting stuff. Go to NowIKnow.com to sign up for the daily email.
• It was Groundhog Day on Monday and that little shit saw his shadow so we are getting 6 more weeks of winter. But here's what I don't get. The first day of spring is March 20. This is about 6 and a half weeks from February 2. Why do we need a big rat to tell us we have 6 more weeks of winter when we can just look at a calendar?
• Obviously I watched Groundhog Day on Groundhog Day. It's such an amazing movie, everyone knows this so there is no need to rehash it here. I want to recommend another movie with a similar science fiction premise and that is Tom Cruise's Live. Die. Repeat. The trailers and marketing for this movie were awful and most people are over Cruise because he is a total lunatic at best. But this movie was a lot of fun. It had a cool storyline, solid effects and it wasn't too over the top. Most importantly, the movie and Cruise did not take it/himself too seriously. This is a minor spoiler, but if you want to see Cruise killed over and over again, rent this movie.
• Finally, D'Angelo was the musical guest on SNL last weekend (along with J.K. Simmons hosting; what an amazingly random pairing!). D'Angelo put out two really great funk/soul albums about 15 years ago and then disappeared. He was probably best known for the song "Untitled (How Does it Feel?)." In the video he is shot from just above  his penis with no clothes on and it looks like he is receiving a hummer. Anyway, he recently released his first album after 15 years and it is bad ass. I would kill to see a Prince/D'Angelo concert, but they would need to hand out adult diapers at the front door for all the women. Here is one of Sarah's favorite from the new album, "The Door"

Red Sox Off-season Review: Beware Worms

On December 10, 2014, the Boston Red Sox had the following rotation: Clay Buccholz, Joe Kelly, Ruby De La Rosa, Anthony Ranaudo and Allen Webster.

On December 11, 2014, the Boston Red Sox had the following rotation: Rick Porcello, Wade Miley, Clay Buccholz, Joe Kelly, Justin Masterson.

The pitching staff on December 11 is better than the pitching staff on December 10. Analysis over. Article over.

Ok, since you all paid good money to read my thoughts (oh you are here for free?), I will dive a little deeper. The thing is, the analysis of the rotation as it stands right now is really that simple. The three players that the team acquired on 12/11 are better and more reliable than the players they replaced. At the heart of any transaction that a competitive team makes, the goal should be to get a player that is better than the player he is replacing. In these transactions, the mission was accomplished.

Let me get one thing out of the way real quick. I already discussed this in the Jon Lester piece, but when evaluating these deals I really only want to look at what happened and not what people think could have happened. If you want to say they should not have traded for Wade Miley because he had a down year last year and he may not be that good, that is ok. If you want to say they should not have traded for Wade Miley, they should have traded for Jeff Samardzija instead, that is not ok. I'm sure the Sox made an offer to Oakland, but Billy Beane decided he liked the White Sox package centered around a young, MLB ready middle infielder. The Sox have two guys that fit that profile in Xander Bogaerts and Mookie Betts, but I hope none of you think trading either those two for Samardzija would be a smart move.

Since each of these players is an individual, let's take a look at each move individually before discussing the rotation as a whole (if you want a quick analysis just skip to the end)...

Rick Porcello

I will address the other side of this trade (Yoenis Cespedes) when I talk about the offensive additions. For now, let's talk about Porcello, who I think is now the team's "number one" starter. Some people will think calling Porcello our number one is depressing. In his career, he has had an ERA better than league average twice in six seasons. He typically strikes out less than 6 batters per nine innings. His career high in wins is only 15 (you all know I think pitcher wins are as valuable as an asshole on your elbow). Since Porcello has reached the big leagues, he has been nobody's idea of a number one starter, let alone an ace. But he is right now the best pitcher on the Red Sox, and I don't think that is a bad thing at all.

I am very optimistic about Porcello this year. The number one reason is Miguel Cabrera and Prince Fielder. These strapping young men were the third and first basemen, respectively, protecting Porcello's myriad of ground balls in 2012-13. Both men should probably be DH's and that's been true for at least the last 3 years and yet they were being relied on to field behind an extreme ground ball pitcher. This, predictably, led to Porcello surrendering a lot of baserunners which in turn led to a high ERA. In 2014, the Tigers removed Fielder and moved Cabrera to first base, instantly improving the infield defense. Guess what else instantly improved? If you said Porcello's ERA you are right! Well now Porcello is going to a team with a Gold Glove second baseman and two very good defenders at third and first. If all he does is repeat what he did last year in front of a strong defense, then he's a very good pitcher.

Which leads me to my second point and that is the fact that I think Porcello is going to be even better this year. Porcello is going to be 26 years old this coming year and yet this will be his 7th full season in the bigs. All the pitchers that were on the roster were the same age or slightly younger and had between one and two seasons in the majors. These are all players we viewed as prospects, but Porcello is already fully realized. If we were hoping for those other guys to be a little better this year, couldn't we also make the same assumption about Porcello? Players tend to peak in their mid to late 20's so it is entirely possible we still haven't seen the best out of this guy.

It sucks that we only have him under contract for one season, but Cespedes also only had one season left so it seems like a fair swap. If he pitches really well this year and prices himself out of the Red Sox budget, then we will get a first round draft pick for him. However, I think if he pitches well here, the Sox will try to extend him and he will accept. Because he is only 26 years old, the team will feel much more comfortable giving him a 5 or 6 year deal that takes him to his age 32 or 33 season.

Bonus fun fact: He's a handsome dude. Also, he and his dad are supposedly building a cabin in Vermont (do they allow father-son marriages now too?), so I guess this means he is even more likely to sign here long term.

Justin Masterson

I'm not incredibly excited about Masterson, but he is only signed to a one year deal and he is likely a better bet to be serviceable than the De La Rosa/Webster/Ranaudo trio. I do think it was a good gamble on someone who has produced very good seasons recently in the majors.

In 2013, Masterson was a really good starter. A pitcher who has always been a ground ball machine (his career rate of 56.6% ground balls would have ranked third in the league last year among qualified starters), he took his strikeouts to a whole new level. For most of his career to that point he struck out about 17% of the batters he faced. In 2013, he upped that to 24%, which ranked 15th in all baseball. The main change in his approach that season was an increased reliance on a nasty slider that was nearly unhittable. The performance earned him his only All Star appearance and at just 28 years old he looked like a young pitcher hitting his prime.

Then last year he crashed back to earth. An early season knee injury evidently lead to altered mechanics, decreased velocity on the fastball (over 3 MPH), and a diminished reliance on his dominant slider. He was still a groundball machine (his 58.2% rate was the second highest of his career), but the strikeouts fell back and the walks increased. Players seemed to be able to lay off the slider more this year because they could just wait on the hittable fastball. With more balls in play and a questionable infield defense (former catcher Carlos Santana started the year at 3B and played 26 games there), his ERA sky rocketed. An in-season trade to St. Louis proved not to help either.

So why am I slightly optimistic about Masterson? First, he claims to be healthy again. If he is able to get his fastball up to 93 MPH and the coaching staff can get him to rely on the slider again, I don't see why his high strikeout rate won't continue. The second reason is the same reason that I am optimistic about Porcello (and Wade Miley) and that is the infield defense. Despite the injury, Masterson still got hitters to pound the ball into the ground a lot last year and that should continue. And if Masterson can't return to what he was in 2013, this is only a one year deal and he could have value as a bullpen specialist against righties. There is still enough rotation depth to replace him if he struggles.

Bonus fun fact: He was born in Jamaica.

Wade Miley

This seems like a good time to explain a stat called FIP: Fielding Independent Pitching. This is based off a theory developed years ago by a writer named Voros McCracken (sounds like a Bond villain), where he realized that pitchers only have so much control over what happens once a ball is hit. They mostly control strikeouts, walks and home runs, but once a ball is put in the field of play they can't really dictate what happens (later people realized that different pitchers have control over ground balls and fly balls at least).

If you think about it, and if you've been following my analysis of Porcello and Masterson, this makes sense. If a routine ground ball is hit to Derek Jeter's left, it's likely to get through the infield for a base hit because Jeter, like another Derek, Zoolander, can't go left. But if that same exact ground ball is hit to Andrelton Simmons, it's an easy out. In those situations, the pitcher did nothing different, but in one situation he gave up a hit and the other he came one out closer to getting out of the inning.

FIP strips away the majority of balls put in play and focuses mostly on strikeouts, walks and home runs allowed and produces a number that is scaled to look like ERA. FIP is particularly useful when trying to determine whether a player who had a bad ERA will bounce back the following year, or if a player with a great ERA will collapse. If your ERA is higher than your FIP, you probably had an unlucky season. If you subtract FIP from ERA, you can see who may have had the most unlucky season.

In 2014, Wade Miley had a 4.34 ERA and a 3.98 FIP. The difference of 0.36 was 17th in baseball among pitchers with at least 162 innings pitched. Oh by the way, number one on that list was Clay Buccholz with a difference of 1.33, yet another reason for optimism this year. Also, Masterson would have ranked number one if he had enough innings with a difference of 1.34.

Ok, this makes sense at a certain level, but does it actually hold true? Do starters with an ERA higher than their FIP correct themself the following year? Well, while one data point doesn't prove a theory, we don't have to look farther than our own Rick Porcello to find a correlation. From 2010-2013, Porcello had an ERA of 4.64 and a FIP of 3.95. In 2014 when he had a better infield to pitch in front of, he had an ERA of 3.43 and a FIP of 3.67. For pitchers that put a lot of balls in play, a good defense is so important.

Miley, like Porcello and Masterson, generates a lot of ground balls (51.1% last season). Like those two guys he has also had a really strong season in his past (his rookie year in 2012). The significant differences with Miley are that he's a lefty and he's under team control for 3 more years. Lefties can struggle in Fenway because of the short porch in left, but with his ability to keep the ball on the ground, I think Miley will be comfortable here.

One thing to note about Miley is that he saw an uptick in strikeouts in 2014. Like Masterson in 2013, Miley started throwing his slider a lot more. Sliders are really difficult to hit for same handed hitters because it starts off looking like a fastbll, but once you realize it's a slider it has started darting far, far away from you. It appears this is a swing and miss pitch that should help Miley get out of situations with runners on base if he keeps it up.

Bonus fun fact: The D-Backs tried to get him to stop eating gluten and he told them to fuck off. He's going to love the North End.

Final Thoughts

The Sox had a clear Plan B when they lost out on Lester and there are some themes shared by the players they acquired.

• Each player is in his 20's. The team is trying to avoid commitments to pitchers in their 30's.
• Each player has had at least one strong season in the majors. The trio of De La Rosa/Ranaudo/Webster all have promise but none of them have translated that to Major League success. It was clearly important to find guys that have done it before.
• The Sox must believe they have a strong infield defense. Joe Kelly gives up the fewest ground balls in the rotation at about 48% (still well above average), so the infield is going to get a workout. These days, pitchers with high strikeout rates are all the rage, but if you have the right players you can find value in guys who generate specific kinds of contact.
• The goal was to find players better than the players they had on the roster without dipping into their pool of top prospects. They dealt from a position of strength in getting Porcello and offloaded a couple young pitchers they no longer wanted to get Miley. Masterson only cost money.
• The rotation overall may not be elite but it will be deep. Each pitcher has a high likelihood of being at least average. Combine an average start with an elite offense and the team should win a lot of games.
• If any of the new or incumbent starters are hurt or ineffective, the team still has Ranaudo, Workman, Wright, Owens, Rodriguez and Johnson to step in. Or, they could dip into that depth to acquire any number of other pitchers mid-season.
• If a trade for an "ace" does present itself, any of these guys can be bumped from the rotation. If Ruben Amaro lowers his demands, the team will have no problem sticking Masterson or Kelly in the bullpen or trading away Buccholz or Miley.

Bottom line, the moves improve the team. I think there is a lot of upside with these guys and Ben Cherington did a great job to pivot so quickly when they lost their number 1 target. There is still a lot of off-season left so the rotation could change, but if the season started tomorrow (now that Rondo is gone baseball can't come soon enough) I would be very comfortable with this crew.

Red Sox Offseason Review: Jon Lester

Repeat after me: Jon Lester is a Chicago Cub. Repeat after me again: Jon Lester was an Oakland A's free agent. Accepting these two basic facts is the first step towards understanding how the Red Sox were unable to bring one of the best left handed pitchers in team history back to Boston.

My simple analysis here is that I would have been happy if Lester had come back, even if the Sox were willing to match the $155 million contract he received, but I am not upset that he didn't return. I think there is a very healthy debate to be had over whether or not bringing him back on a six year deal was the right move at all, let alone one that will pay him over $25 million a year.

Since all the radio discussions have started/focused on the contract extension negotiations in March, I guess that is where I will start too. I will get this out of the way by saying that in making a 4 year $70 million offer to open negotiations, the team basically killed its chance at extending Lester for the notorious "hometown discount." I definitely don't think it killed their chances of signing him at all, but it meant he was going to test the waters to see what his market really was.

The thing is, in March 2014, his value shouldn't have been crazy high. Let's play a little game of player A and player B (granted I am cherry picking here; the analysis for long term contracts is much more nuanced here but it is illustrative of how the Red Sox could have started with 4 for $70).

From 2012 to 2013:

Player A: 24-22 record, 4.28 ERA, 418.2 IP, 97 ERA+*, 1.34 WHIP, 2.54 K/BB ratio
Player B: 25-24 record, 4.08 ERA, 390.1 IP, 95 ERA+*, 1.29 WHIP, 3.12 K/BB ratio

*ERA+ is a players ERA compared to his league average taking into account whether he pitches in a pitchers or hitters park. Player A is 3% worse than average; Player B is 5% worse than average.

Player A is Jon Lester; not exactly a great performance in the time leading up to the extension talks. Player B is Ricky Nolasco. Nolasco was a free agent after 2013 and he signed a 4 year, $49 million contract with the Minnesota Twins that off-season after posting very similar numbers to Jon Lester the previous two years.

Now, there are several differences that make Nolasco worse at that particular time than Lester. Nolasco was a year older (though when their new contracts start they would be the same age) and right handed. Lester had just had a dominant post season run while Nolasco pitched in one playoff game and gave up 3 runs in 4 innings. Lester also had many years of success prior to 2012 where Nolasco was below average most of that time. Nolasco pitched in the easier National League in a pitchers park while Lester was in the AL in a hitters park (though this is taken into account in ERA+). On the other hand, Nolasco was a free agent and free agent deals are always going to cost more than extensions before free agency.

I am not saying Nolasco is the equal of Jon Lester. In fact, offering Lester 4 for $70 shows that the Sox agree with that. All I am doing by pointing this out is that Lester's bargaining position wasn't as strong at the beginning of 2014 as people think. Until August 6, 2013, Lester had a 4.52 ERA before he got hot for 2 regular season months and one playoff month. With 2 years of data showing diminished performance and a much diminished strikeout rate, it was fair for the Red Sox to wonder whether it was smart to throw huge money at the guy for the next 6 years, all of which would be in his 30's when players typically decline. The team knew 4 for $70 wasn't going to get it done and maybe that was the point. Maybe they never really wanted him back, but I will get to that in a minute.

Lester headed into the 2014 season without a new deal. He bet on himself and it was clearly the right decision. By any measure (ERA+, WAR, FIP, ERA, K/BB) he had the best season of his career. The success seemed to show that maybe he made some kind of adjustment in his approach or mechanics in the middle of 2013 so this probably wasn't a fluke (seems like he ditched his changeup and threw his cutter more). Unfortunately for the Red Sox, Lester couldn't help the Red Sox score any runs so his success on the mound was completely neutralized. When the trade deadline rolled around, the team was faced with a choice: hang onto Lester and risk losing him for a late first round draft pick, or trade him for future assets. The Sox chose the latter and it was absolutely the right choice.

Some people believe that by trading him, the Sox hurt their bargaining position with him in free agency. I think this is completely false. Forgive me for temporarily speaking in hypotheticals and playing armchair psychologist, but by offering Lester 4 for $70, the team ended any hope they had in extending Lester or getting him for a major discount. Trading him at mid-season did not hurt their position whatsoever because he was not going to sign an extension and the Sox were going to be treated like any other team no matter what. If anything, the Sox did Lester a favor by giving him a chance to win another ring. This says nothing of the fact that the team traded 2 months of a player they had no use for for an extra year of a middle of the order bat plus a second round draft pick. It was a great trade for the Sox.

When the off-season started, the Sox began their pursuit of Lester pretty quickly. Reports said the first offer was 6 and $110 million, which seemed like another offer that meant the team didn't really want him back. But this wasn't a take it or leave it offer. When negotiating, one side offers low and the other side counters high. Eventually you meet somewhere in the middle. The Sox did nothing wrong starting at this level. They continued to increase their offer up to the end. John Henry flew to Lester's house to meet with him. These may have been PR moves, but at the end of the day the team made a pretty large offer to him and if he had accepted it then he would have been our Opening Day starter with no regrets. The Red Sox were one of two finalists for his services because Lester wanted to pitch here despite the low-ball March offer, the mid-season trade and the initial low offer to start the off-season. He was not insulted by anything the team did, nor should he be.

$135 million over 6 years is a lot of money and you can easily argue that is what Lester is worth. You can also argue that he is worth $155 million over 6 years. You can also argue that no pitcher in his 30's should get a 6 year deal. All arguments would be valid. Different teams have different methods of evaluating talent and all the wicked smart people in the Boston front office determined that Jon Lester was at most worth $135 million over 6 years. You could say that $155 million is only an extra $3 million a year so why not just give it to the guy if that's what would get it done, but where does it end? A team has to trust it's analysis and set a ceiling for what it is willing to pay. It is possible that the team knew that $135 million was just enough to be competitive but not actually get the job done, but that's a dangerous game to play. If you don't want a player for that much money you shouldn't offer it just in case he accepts.

Let's also be clear about something: this is a crazy risky deal. Pitchers are so unpredictable because of injury. Most pitchers get injured, even ones that looked durable when they were younger. CC Sabathia was a better and equally durable pitcher when he signed his big contract at age 28. The first 3 seasons of that deal worked out well, but then he under performed greatly in season 4 and was injured in season 5. He still has 2 years left and is going to be 34 next year. I think there is a much greater chance that Lester is bad for the last half of this deal than he is good, though some people seem to be ok with that. But why? Why just accept that for 2 or 3 years of a contract you are going to burn $25 million per year and it won't matter? It will matter! That's still a lot of money that you can't just ignore. Look at the Yankees this past year. They had all those expensive arms that were hurt or not effective and there was nothing they could do to fix it. Teams do have a limit on what they can and want to spend.

This is the problem with getting hung up on any one player. Yes, Jon Lester would have made the Red Sox a better team next year. He was the second best pitcher available in free agency and far better than any pitcher the team had under contract at the time of the negotiations. But he was not the only pitcher available and he was not the only pitcher that was better than what the Sox had at that time and signing an "ace" (which is still debatable whether he even is one) is not the only way to make your team better. You can improve the offense (which the team did), the bullpen (which is still possible) or the rest of the rotation where you have crappy options (which the team did). You can also realize that it is only early December and there is plenty of time to make other moves.

In sports, players are really assets to the front office. It's weird to say because as fans we love the human element. It's what brings us to the ballpark. The thrill of victory and agony of defeat. But when you are building a team, each player is essentially a number on your ledger of wins and losses. If you get hung up on specific players rather than the wins and losses you end up overpaying in dollars or prospects when you could have shifted strategies to improve your team just as much in another way. The Sox missed an opportunity to improve their roster at that time with just one player, but, as you will see, they have since found other ways to improve in 2015 and maintain a more flexible future.

We will all miss Jon Lester. He helped bring 2 World Series to Boston. He recovered from cancer to become one of the best pitchers we have ever seen in Boston. He helped bring chicken and beer to the clubhouse (oh wait, we are supposed to hate him for that right?). He was a very intense competitor. He threw a gorgeous cut fastball. He was a three time All Star. He has an outside chance at the Hall of Fame. The Cubs got an excellent player who should help accelerate their bid for contention. But in the long run, I think the Boston Red Sox will be better off.

Red Sox Offseason Review: Preface

I was driving on the Mass Pike this past Friday around 4 o'clock in absolutely brutal traffic. I guess people, myself included, don't work until 5 on Fridays anymore? Any way, I was having a bad time. Maybe it was the bad time I was having, the flurry of Red Sox moves made this week or the fact that I had already listened to my Presidents of the United States of America CD two times that day, but for some reason I decided to flip on sports radio for a bit to see what they had to say about the moves. If any of you have listened to Boston sports radio, you can imagine what the hosts and callers were saying. The team is too cheap even though they have the third highest payroll! How could you sign Justin Masterson to replace Jon Lester? Why would you spend so much money on two guys who aren't even that good and will probably get hurt? Let's talk about what happened last March! 2013 was just lucky and an aberration!

It was all so predictable, uninformed and short sighted that I felt it was necessary to say something. Before I get into the individual moves, I wanted to go through some common themes that have come up through their moves and in all the moves of the baseball world this offseason.

1. Money doesn't matter except when it does: The team clearly has a lot of money to spend. Hanley Ramirez and Pablo Sandoval will make a combined $40 million this year and Lester would have added another $23 million. The team has already made it clear that they are willing to blow past the luxury tax threshold for THIS year. But one thing they don't want to do is go past it for multiple years because when you do that, your tax payments increase dramatically. So the team is fine with large payouts this year, but when they look 4, 5, 6 years down the line they want to maintain financial flexibility. This article shows the teams with the largest guaranteed payrolls in each future season for the next 13 years. In 2016, the Yankees already have $170 million committed to just 10 players including the no longer effective CC Sabathia, Mark Teixeira, Alex Rodriguez, Carlos Beltran, Brian McCann, and Martin Prado. So the Sox are fine with offering long term contracts to players, but if they want to avoid what the Yankees, Dodgers, Rangers, Tigers and Angels are facing, they need to limit the total number of long term deals and the number of players over 30 years old that have them. In the short term, it is fine to spend a lot, but the money matters long term so they can continue to add to their team.
2. Offense is more difficult to acquire right now than pitching: I will get into this much more in depth when I cover the additions of HanRam and Panda. The Red Sox pounced on these two very early in free agency even though they already had a strong lineup in place and a terrible rotation at the start of free agency. Offense is down around baseball and there were only a few legit offensive threats on the market this year, compared to a robust free agent and trade market for pitchers. I have a feeling like the Red Sox internally have a valuation that says offense is even more important than we realize. Which brings me to my next point...
3. MLB front offices are smarter than me, you and definitely everyone on the radio: With the exception of Ruben Amaro in Philly and possibly whoever is running the Rockies these days, baseball front offices are smarter than they have ever been. There aren't many Woody Woodward's running around any more (the man who traded Jason Varitek and Derek Lowe for Heathcliff Slocumb). Sure, teams make debatable moves all the time and part of being a sports fan is arguing these moves. But one thing we have to admit to ourselves is that these people making the moves know more about stats, scouting, business, negotiation and player valuation than any of us. They have proprietary databases, financial experts and access to cutting edge data that none of us have even seen. If you think a player is worth $X and they think he is worth $Y, I am siding with them.
4. Prospects matter except when they don't: Sorry for another confusing headline. Prospects are really important to fill your team with cheap, controllable players so that you can fill other spots with expensive players who are more likely to perform. However, aside from the elite, near major league ready prospects, every other one is expendable in a trade. The team saw last year that it is just too risky to rely on too many young players that aren't elite. Even Xander Bogaerts, who is absolutely still elite, went through some prolonged slumps. This is why the team can't get rid of their top 4 young players, but anyone else should be free to go. I will go much deeper into this in the pitching section. 
5. Spring training doesn't start until mid-February: One thing the bitchers seem to forget is that there is still a LOT of offseason left. The team still needs more relief pitching, a backup catcher and they could use a better starter than what they currently have, not to mention they have too many outfielders still. People are acting as if the team is done. They are not done at all.
6. There is more than one way to win: The team needs an ace! Where's our ace! Gimme an ace! Ok, it would be nice to have an "ace", it really would. But that is not the only way to win in this league. The Royals won with a dominant bullpen, contact hitters, decent starting pitching, defense and speed. The Giants won with a stars and scrubs lineup and rotation and a dominant "ace." Other teams win with slugging offenses. Other teams win with 3 aces. There is no one way to do this. The goal should be to find as much talent as possible and that's what the Red Sox re dong right now.
7. Ignore hypotheticals: One of the most frustrating things this offseason, and probably every offseason, is how people just assume that the Red Sox can get any player they want with money or by trade. Why didn't we get Jeff Samadzija, we could have beat that offer? Maybe Billy Beane just really wanted Marcus Semien? If we had just matched the Cubs offer of $155 milllion we would have gotten Lester. Maybe he just wanted to go to Chicago for a new challenge? If we just offer Mookie and Xander to the Phillies we can get Hamels. Maybe that is dumb? I want to only focus on what the team actually did.

So over the course of the next couple weeks, I will dig into some of the major moves (and non-moves) the team has made so far. First up will be a review of the Jon Lester saga. Stay tuned...

Dan Shaughnessy rejects talk of blackmail*

*All interviews and subjects in this article are completely fictional and fabricated, even those based on real people. This is in response to his interview with David Ortiz on May 8, 2013 where he blatantly accuses him of cheating without any evidence. I won't link to the article so you will have to find it on the Net.

"Were you abused as a child, scared to smile, they called you ugly?"
Nas, "Ether"

Writing is not this difficult. Writers don't have to get worse as they age (Peter Gammons still going strong). Baseball writing has been peppered with awful writers for the last 20 years. The bad writers always seem to get more press than the good writers. A number of writers from the Boston Globe have been accused of plagiarizing. Continued employment despite lack of skills is often tied to blackmailing. It is not natural for someone with that face to appear so frequently on TV.

So Dan Shaugnessy knows. He knows he is untalented. He knows the majority of people who read him think he is a hack. His name appears frequently on sites like Awful Announcing and Fire Joe Morgan. And what he just did to David Ortiz should be the final straw.

When you blackmail people for personal gain they tell you to not try to shoot for the absolute top of the pantheon to make it look less fishy. Shaughnessy can't even seem to do that. He just keeps appearing on all of Boston's beloved sports media (Globe, 98.5, NESN) spewing false bile. Shaughnessy extended his streak of awfulness and borderline libel (his only true talent seems to be not going so far as to get sued in his baseless accusations) with his column about Ortiz and steroid use on May 8.

This is a ridiculous and fake topic, and since I can't get face to face out of both a lack of access and fear of turning to stone, I made up an interview with Shaughnessy to discuss his years of blackmailing people in power to get where he is. I told him he looks ugly.

Do you read the comments and emails saying you must have "naked pictures of all your superiors performing Un-Christian acts"?

"No, not really," Shaughnessy said. "Why?"

Because there is no other explanation for why you have a job let alone three of them.

"I have editors that review my columns some of the time," he said. "They make me change about 90% of what I try to write when they actually read my stuff. Luckily, this year I'd say I've only been edited about 5 times, so most of my good stuff gets out there untarnished. They don't warn you when they'll review you though. They just edit."

What does it feel like to have everyone know you have no talent and for them to tell you that?

"I don't think I have no talent," he said. "Nobody comes to me and tells me, 'You have no talent and the world would be better off if you just locked yourself in a tower for the rest of time and never communicated with the public ever again.'"

But they do. Bloggers write entire posts about you. I have emailed you to tell you that in so many words. You work for the Boston Globe where a lot of bad writers and plagiarists have worked. You are an older writer getting worse as you age like Murray Chass. You've written columns consistent with libel. You show up on all these sites about horrible writing. You fit all the formulas.

"Shit, I'm a human being like everyone else (ed. note: no you aren't)," said Shaughnessy. "You can blackmail or you can get fired. One or the other."

But in 2009 you plagiarized your own bad writing. Now this baseless accusation of Ortiz. You are like baseball writing's Freddy Krueger. What's the difference?

"Well in 2009 I didn't really understand the breadth of the internet," he said. "In 2009 I thought I could get away with just repeating the same old bullshit that I did years earlier. Once I learned my lesson, I remembered that to keep my job I would have to blackmail people and write the most outrageous shit that popped into my poorly sculpted skull. It's not like this is the first time I've written such an awful attack piece and gotten away with it."

But it's like at some point with this much awful writing and lack of TV or Radio presence you have to start getting fired from jobs you have no right holding.

"Where are you trying to go with this? That's my question. If you've held a job for over 30 years aren't you just supposed to be able to keep it no matter how terrible you are?"

No, people get fired or let go all the time even holding jobs for more than 30 years. Teachers, factory workers, CEO's, policemen all lose their jobs if they aren't performing or blatantly walking the tightrope with the law no matter how long they've been entrenched.

"Real jobs that actually benefit people aren't the same," said Shaughnessy. "I don't forget about causing outrage. I go up there," - he points to the Globe's head Sports Editor's office - "and show him all those naked pictures I have of him. Every other day. If I don't do it, he might forget that he should fire me for my incompetence, and I don't want to have to release the pictures if I can avoid it."

"I don't like to talk about this blackmail thing because then people know my secret of career immortality."

But how can your professional opportunities continue to grow when all you do is get worse? How do you do that?

"I don't get worse," he said. "My writing has been this destructive since the day I got here."

"I just don't want this blackmail thing getting out there, cause I have pictures of you and I don't want to have to use those either."

But writing is really not that hard, how can you be so awful at it? You've been doing this for over 30 years. You write for one of the most renowned sports sections in the country.

"It isn't hard, bro. But getting every person to know your name is. On my good day I enrage millions of people in print, on the radio and on TV. It's pretty easy. It just happens."

"I work consistently to get my name on the lips of other people (ed. note: gross). I don't write a scathing column weekly, I don't accuse people from afar, I don't remind my bosses of the naked pictures to be a good writer. If I want to be a good writer, or not hated, then I could actually learn more about the sports I cover and write interesting things breaking down what happens on the field and write compelling stories about how the top athletes in the world have persevered to reach the tops of their industries."

"No, I write sludge every time out and I go on TV and make it worse. One day I'll die, probably, and then I'll stop, probably."

Do you understand why people hate what you do?

"I don't care what people think, bro, only that they know my name. People don't feed my ego. I feed my ego."

"I am never going to be a good writer, bro. That's the bottom line. If I write something nice and fair, it's bad. If I write something scathing, factually inaccurate and borderline illegal, it's bad, too."

"I don't care. I've got something to hide, bro. Firing is not my problem. Being fired - I write stuff that begs to get me fired. I got no problem with that. I can't screw anything up with my career because I have what it takes to keep my job, naked pictures. That's not gonna happen."

"If I don't want to keep pissing people off and falsely accusing good people? I go home. But not because I got fired for being unethical."

"I guarantee you that later, you are not going to find out that I was fired for gross incompetence. It's not happening. Guaranteed. Guaranteed. Because I have naked pictures of all my bosses."

Again, can't stress enough, this was a made up interview.

He Ain't Heavy, He's My Brother

October 20, 2007. Game 6. Boston. The Boston Red Sox are now down 3-2 in the ALCS to the Cleveland Indians after winning Game 5. The Sox need to win Game 6 to extend their season and capture their second World Series Championship in 4 years.

It is the bottom of the first inning and the first three batters reach base against Fausto Carmona (now known as Roberto Hernandez). Fausto had a dominant 2007 in his first full season as a starter finishing in 4th place in the Cy Young voting. But in the first inning of this game he was already in trouble. The next batter was Manny Ramirez, but Fausto struck him out. He was followed by eventual World Series MVP Mike Lowell, but Fausto got him to fly out weakly enough where the runner on third could not score.

Next up was Boston's favorite whipping boy, J.D. "Nancy" Drew. The majority of Red Sox fans hated Drew because he was paid a lot of money, had a lot of injuries (though over his first 4 years in Boston played more games than the "gritty" Kevin Youkilis), didn't hit for a high average or with a lot of power, took a lot of walks and a lot of strike outs looking, was such a great and effortless defender that it looked like he was dogging it, and basically played completely even keeled so it looked like he didn't care. He never cheated. He never assaulted a woman. He never got a DUI. And yet, he was completely hated. And here he was with a golden opportunity to erase that hatred. As he was known to do, Drew worked a 3-1 count, a true hitter's count. The next pitch he deposited deep into the center field seats for what would become the $14 million grand slam.

This was all I could think about last night when J.D.'s younger brother, Stephen went 4-5 with the game tying home run and the walk-off base hit against the Minnesota Twins. Stephen has spent the majority of his time trying to distinguish himself from his brother. Despite similar plate approaches, quiet demeanors, sharing the same last name, batting from the left side, starting slowly, and wearing the same freaking number, ya, J.D. and Stephen are nothing alike. Regardless, Stephen wanted us all to know he wasn't his brother.

Stephen has had an awful start to his season. He missed the first week suffering post concussion symptoms and almost got Wally Pipped by Jose Iglesias. He then hit .154 with a .517 OPS in April with no home runs and 17 strikeouts. His defense was strong as always, but when you don't hit, fans rarely notice your defensive contributions (or managers for that matter; check out past Gold Glove winners and almost all of them had a great offensive season in the years they won the award). Then on May 1 he hit his first home run and his first multi-hit game. Finally, last night he hit the $9.5 million home run and walk-off.

The other star of the night was Clayton Mortensen, the current long reliever for the Sox. With Clay Buchholz leaving too many pitches in the zone, and short starts in the Texas series from every starting pitcher, the bullpen was taxed. They really only had 5 available pitchers and when the ninth inning rolled around they were down to just 2 with a one run lead. The way last night's game slogged along you just knew Joel Hanrahan was not going to protect this lead.

Just a quick aside. Hanrahan clearly did not have it last night and has not had it for most of the season. This is not entirely different from what he did last year though when he walked 5.4 per nine innings. What bothers me is he seems like a guy who makes excuses. This is now the second time he has come up with an injury after a bad outing despite there being no visual evidence. I hate hate hate it when writers call out athletes for not playing through injuries so I guess I am being a major hypocrite here. But we have all played sports with that guy who is having a bad day and then comes up with a mysterious hamstring injury while running out a ground ball so he can just give up or give himself an excuse. I should not be calling Hanrahan out for this, but I can't help but think of "that guy" when I watch him.

Any way, with Hanrahan leaving the game already giving up the tying run, the last man standing was Mortensen. Morensen is a pretty unremarkable pitcher. He doesn't have great stuff, not even averaging 90 MPH on his fastball. He's tall and gangly and has an odd delivery. He has a career 100 ERA+ (meaning his ERA is exactly average over his career). He was a strong addition to the team last year because he could be sent back and forth from Pawtucket when needed, but he does not have that option this year so I suspect he is only on the team until the rest of the bullpen is healthy. But last night he was the man and gave the Sox a chance to win. He got out of the ninth without further damage and then pitched two more scoreless innings working around 2 walks and a single. Then Stephen Drew did his work and Mortensen picked up the W.

It was an ugly game that lasted almost 5 hours and saw the top of the Red Sox lineup hit into 4 killer double plays. Buch scuffled after a week of cheating rumors. Pedro Ciriaco was thrown out trying to steal third with 2 outs in the 8th. Tuesday's starter Ryan Dempster almost had to come into the game in extra innings. But one of the great things about this team and what separates it from the last two years is its depth. Last night the number 9 hitter and the 12th man in the pen took care of business. Just like Ben Cherington drew (no pun intended) it up.

Thoughts I Think: Papi Hot, The Pitching Not

Since last night was one of the rare times where I'm not drinking beer during a Red Sox game, the title of today's post is "Thoughts I Think." I stole this from my talented girlfriend Sadie, who uses this "catch phrase" after she says something...profound about the world. If she ever starts a site where she shares these thoughts with the rest of you then she can have it back.

The Sox lost a rough one yesterday to the struggling Toronto Blue Jays, 9-7. Let's start with some positives though.

• David Ortiz is out of his mind right now. Let's first remember that he is 37 years old and he just came back ten days ago from TWO injured heels. The first couple games back you could kind of tell he wasn't fully right as he wasn't really driving the ball, instead looking to get on base and help the team any way he can. But around his 4th game he started absolutely destroying baseballs and he hasn't stopped. He has hit safely in all 9 games this year. He has had at least 2 hits in 7 of the 9 games, and in the two he didn't he at least hit a double in one and a home run in the other. If RBI are your thing (they are certainly not mine), he already has 15 on the season, placing him 23rd in the AL in just 36 at bats. Travis Hafner has the next fewest at bats in the top 23, with 66. The home run he hit last night was an absolute bomb and if possible I think he actually hit that bases clearing double even harder. Papi shoulda been the hero last night.
• Jon Lester wasn't actually that terrible last night. His pitches looked good and hard. He got some key strikeouts when he needed them. When he missed, he missed low for the most part. Even the home run to Encarnacion was a cutter that he just didn't quite get inside far enough. What really did him in was some bad luck finally catching up with him in the form of allowing runners on base to score (and Salty, but I'll get to him later). I pointed this out to Joe Black yesterday, but I read this sentence somewhere that said "Lester, Lackey and Buchholz, who have struggled at times with men on base, have set career highs this season while stranding (leaving men on base at the end of innings) 81, 86 and 90 percent of their baserunners respectively." Stranding baserunners is generally not a skill as most pitchers basically strand between 70 and 75 percent of baserunners over the course of the season. When you see that someone is setting a career high in something that is not a skill in April, you can expect them to regress towards that average. Last night, Lester regressed, allowing 6 out of 9 baserunners to score for a 33% strand rate.
• Jacoby and Dustin had strong games last night, and though Daniel Nava didn't do much, those three guys are the real reason that Ortiz and Mike Napoli are both in the top 25 in the AL for RBI this year (23rd and 3rd, respectively). RBI is a context based stat and unless you are Justin Upton (12 home runs and 19 RBI) you need runners on base in front of you to accrue RBI. If the Sox had Stephen Drew and Will Middlebrooks batting 1 and 2, neither Papi nor Napoli would be racking up the RBI like they are because Drew and Big Willie don't get on base enough so far.
• I love it when a platoon comes together! Mike Carp (lefty) started the game in left field with the right handed Brandon Morrow on the mound. In his second at bat he abused a Morrow slider to deep right field for his first home run of the year. Then in the 6th, Blue Jays manager John Gibbons brought in lefty reliever Aaron Loup so Farrell, recognizing that every at bat was important from here on with a 3 run deficit, countered by bringing in Jonny Gomes (righty) for Carp. Gomes crushed a fastball to deep left center for his first home run of the year. Platoons, when used right, can be a beautiful thing.
• Gibbons horribly mismanaged his bullpen last night despite the victory. First he pulled Morrow after only 96 pitches and 5 innings. I understand pitch counts, but to that point he had already struck out Mike Napoli twice and he was the first batter in the sixth inning. He could have at least sent him out for one more batter.
• Then he brought in a side arming lefty to face the righty Napoli. Also, besides Carp, there were no lefty hitters coming up again until the number 9 hitter, Stephen Drew. Loup was able to get through 7 batters before being pulled after his short stop committed an error to put men on first and third with one out in the 7th and a two run lead.
• So Gibbons then brought in a right handed reliever Steve Delabar to face Pedroia and Ortiz. Delabar at that point had 12 walks in just over 14 innings, so he's not really a great candidate to put into a game with runners on base and less than 2 outs. Shockingly he walked Pedroia and then Ortiz crushed the double.
• Finally, Gibbons brought in a second lefty specialist, the immortal Darren Oliver, in the 8th to face the bottom of the Red Sox order. If he had a second lefty specialist, why didn't he bring him in to face Ortiz with the bases loaded in the 7th inning when it really mattered?
• One other ridiculous move Gibbons made was pinch hitting for Rajai Davis in the 7th inning after he had been on base 3 times in the game and had wreaked havoc on the base paths. Adam Lind, his replacement, struck out.
• I love watching Morrow pitch. He doesn't really know where the ball is going, but he throws it really frigging hard and with a ton of movement. People have been waiting for him to emerge as an ace for years, but he just can't control his amazing stuff. His matchup against Ortiz in the 5th was a thing of beauty. After getting lucky with throwing a high changeup/splitter for a ball on the first pitch, he came back with two filthy splitters down in the zone that Ortiz swung through. Then on the last pitch he threw a 90 MPH slider in the same location but with the opposite break, completely fooling the hottest hitter on the planet. For a baseball geek it was like Princess Leia in a bikini.
• Jarrod Saltalamacchia. I will not mention how beautiful I think your swing is anymore unless you stop throwing the ball to first to pick off runners. You can barely throw to second or the pitcher for that matter, stop snap throwing to first. You have done this a few times this year already and luckily come away unscathed, but finally you were scathed hard last night and you deserved it. Stop it right now. I used to be a lefty catcher and it was always really hard for me to try and throw runners out at third because I would have to catch the pitch then awkwardly pivot my body. It's the same thing with a righty throwing to first. Unless you magically ingested the soul of Ivan Rodriguez, just stop.
• Tough night for Junichi Tazawa. Still have lots of faith in him, but homers for him and Koji Uehara could prove to be a problem this year.
• Joel Hanrahan, sucking my hat (that's what SMH means right? I seriously only know what LOL and BRB mean as far as computer talk goes).
• Finally, Will Middlebrooks needs a rest. Or a hug. Or a sip from Jobu's rum. Poor guy is so lost right now. It's probably the wrist and a lack of plate discipline, but it just looks sad.

Three Strike Thursday

Here are three quick hits for Thursday (quick for me anyway):

• The starters need to start pitching deeper into games. Through 14 games, Sox starters have pitched exactly 5 innings 8 times (actually 7, in John Lackey's start he threw 4 1/3 but I'm going to count that). Eventually this is going to place a tremendous strain on the bullpen, even though it goes about 10 deep. The Red Sox rank an excellent second in starter's runs allowed per game at just 2.79 (behind Atlanta who is only allowing 1.93 runs per game!). They rank a respectable 16th in innings per start with 5.9 (basically because they have 0 disaster starts where the starter goes something like 2 innings and gives up 8 runs, like they did about 162 times last year in Boston). But where you see their struggle is in quality start percentage. A quality start is when a pitcher pitches at least 6 innings and gives up 3 earned runs or less. A quality start (QS) is not a great stat because a line of 6 innings and 3 runs is not exactly high quality. We could also get into the fact that the word "quality" does not measure anything (see this article by Joe Posnanski for a deeper discussion on quality starts), but this is supposed to be a quick hit. But to show that the Sox are not pitching deep enough, this works well. Through 14 games they have a QS% of 43% of games pitched, which ranks 25th in the Major Leagues. Aside from Buchholz, who has 3 QS, the starters are wasting too many pitches to get through lineups and they are forcing their way out of games. The team leads the league in strikeouts per nine innings, but if it wants to make it through the season with a healthy bullpen it is going to have to look to get some more efficient outs.
• How about Mike Carp ya'll? Three for three with two doubles and a triple. When I saw he was starting last night I was not too excited, even with Jonny Gomes slumping. Carp bats left handed, but historically has done better against lefties, which is not what you would expect. Justin Masterson has an extreme platoon split (about .200 points in OPS worse against lefties) so the move made some sense, but given how bad Carp was in Spring Training and his opposite splits I didn't think much would come of it. I think at some point this year I will stop questioning John Ferrell because about 9 out of 10 moves he makes are right so far. Unfortunately I have some deep scars from Leatherface that may never properly heal even if Ferrell becomes my metaphorical Mederma.
• Speaking of Masterson, most of you remember that he used to play for Boston and was the main piece in the Victor Martinez trade waaaay back in 2009, back when people actually liked baseball in Boston. Some people may look at how well Masterson pitched in 2011 and how well he has started off this season and the fact that Martinez is plying his trade in Detroit now and determine that the Sox did poorly in this trade. This would overlook two key facts. The first is that Martinez had a very good season and a half in Boston, equaling the output Masterson had in 2011. The second is that when Victor signed in Detroit, the Sox received 2 compensation draft picks in the 2011 draft. Those picks? Matt Barnes and Henry Owens, the consensus 1st and 3rd best pitching prospects in the Sox farm system.