Game Recap: Moving, and outright Laziness.

by Allen Chace on Jun 5, 2008 5:44 AM EDT in Game Stories

Summary:

Well, it wasn't vintage Becks, no matter how much the numbers might tell us otherwise. There was some iffiness, and an injury-scare. He certainly did get the job done though, and I'm not going to say he didn't earn the win. He absolutely did. And the iffiness could be chalked up to the raininess, I suppose.

Following Becks was three strong innings of relief from MDC, Oki, and Hansen in that order. MDC, in particular, looked pretty strong, striking out the side in the 7th. We need one (ideally two) of those three to start looking like a lockdown setup man.

Our new (hopefully he remains so) #3 hitter was the top performer on the night, 2-3, 2 R, BB, SB. This is what they envisioned from Drew, and to say that this'll be the norm from now on probably isn't fair. But the fact remains, he's a very talented hitter who works the count and gets on base at an excellent rate. He should be higher in the lineup with Papi out, so that "Being" and Lowell can knock him in, rather than standing on 1B while Lugo and Coco fail to do so. As far as Coco goes? I haven't seen a good angle replay of either of his SB attempts, so I couldn't hazard a guess as to whether anyone is right at all in that mess.

Eric Hinske stealing 3B? 'Tek and Becks should be embarrassed.

Player of the Game:

via d.yimg.com

Could be that Becks is that statistically better choice for this game, but Drew hit well in this one and deserves some recognition for his play of late. Is this like the NBA giving the MVP to Kobe rather than KG or Chris Paul? *Shrugs* Also, no.

Rant-o-licious:

So Papi is out? So what? Or, I just want to weigh in. Like FJM does, twice. But honestly. If he's out for longer than a month, or for the rest of the season, we might have to explore outside options. I've seen many bandied about, but one has been conspicuously absent, probably because his GM is bluffing that he's not on the block. But why wouldn't he be? This player is: 1) Hitting well, 2) Might be too old to be part of the "next great X team", 3) Talented OF who can play all 3 spots while also being potent enough offensively to DH, 4) Patient at the plate, 5) Seems to have matured since his early years in the Majors. This is the kind of player, when you should be in somewhat of a rebuilding mode, that can bring you back a good return to help your team in the future. And who is our mystery guest?

Milton Bradley. Let the virtual-flogging begin. (I am, of course, aware of his ridiculous BABIP and some other issues that come along with him. I still think he'd be a better option (tradewise, that is) than many of the other names brought up thusfar.)

Tweet Comment 9 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Milton Bradley?

When was the last time he played over a 100 games in a season? He is indeed posting a OPS+ of 186 this year, but his career averages are nothing spectacular. And I’m not sure on how cheap we could get him…

It's the same old story. Boy finds girl, boy loses girl, girl finds boy, boy forgets girl, boy remembers girl, girls dies in a tragic blimp accident over the Orange Bowl on New Year's Day.

by MerryGoByeBye on Jun 5, 2008 12:30 PM EDT reply actions

If we have to get somebody, I'd rather it not be Bonds

which = trade market. And I trust more in the abilities of Milton Bradley than I do in career NLers Jason Bay and Matt ”.780 career OPS outside of Coors Field” Holliday.

"Are you a real doctor, or a doctor like Dr. Pepper is a doctor?"

by Allen Chace on Jun 5, 2008 1:45 PM EDT up reply actions

Bonds would only cost us money

I’m not big on signing him either. At best, he would give us average production. My point is that he would only costs us money, not any prospects. Jason Bay and Matt Holliday are not players I love as well. If we’re going to trade, really, I’d rather have Garrett Atkins or Adam Dunn (especially the second). They’re also NLers, and Atkins also have the home/away split. But it would take less to get ‘em than it would to get Holliday.

It's the same old story. Boy finds girl, boy loses girl, girl finds boy, boy forgets girl, boy remembers girl, girls dies in a tragic blimp accident over the Orange Bowl on New Year's Day.

by MerryGoByeBye on Jun 5, 2008 2:21 PM EDT up reply actions

+1 on Adam Dunn, depending on the price.

Perfect AL DH, and he’d be a FA. Could be cost-prohibitive, and we might be one of his no-trade teams.

Atkins scares me, because he doesn’t hit as well as any of the other options and he’s not a good 3B.

"Are you a real doctor, or a doctor like Dr. Pepper is a doctor?"

by Allen Chace on Jun 5, 2008 3:16 PM EDT up reply actions

The only bad thing about getting Dunn

Is that I also see him as mostly a DH. And he’s too good to ride the pine (which he would, if Papi is back). But if Ortiz is out for the season, he would be the best option we’d have (the best, not the cheapest).

I like Atkins, I think he’s a good hitter. His career OPS+ is 110, which is okay. The thing about him is that he wouldn’t take many prospects to get, and is still young enough.

It's the same old story. Boy finds girl, boy loses girl, girl finds boy, boy forgets girl, boy remembers girl, girls dies in a tragic blimp accident over the Orange Bowl on New Year's Day.

by MerryGoByeBye on Jun 5, 2008 3:27 PM EDT up reply actions

The first FJM open letter was hilarious. I loved the line “Voltron-like megarecliner.”

I can’t agree with a Milton Bradley signing. Bradley has the same problems that Bonds does, but without the latter’s talent. They both cheated in the Game of Life, gorging from a steroidal Candy Land like Hungry Hungry Hippos. Moreover, Bradley’s well known anger issues would hinder the Operation of the team. And while Bond’s career OBP (.444) is enough to make you cry Yahtzee, signing Milton Bradley would be nothing but Trouble.

by 0157H7 on Jun 5, 2008 1:34 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs

I can't remember Bradley ever being brought up as a steroid-user

Did I just miss it? And he’s another player who (beyond his early years in Cleveland) has basically only had teammate issues with Jeff Kent. Also, in terms of having similar issues, if Bradley is healthy, he’s a good defender in CF and an excellent defender in the corners, something Bonds can no longer boast of. And his blowup with the umpire last season was, by all accounts, attributable to the umpire for the most part.

What I envision with Bradley is him playing LF in most away games, DHing at home for the most part. We might actually be able to get him more reasonably than the other trade targets since he’s an impending FA and BECAUSE of some of the minor negatives you can bring up about him.

"Are you a real doctor, or a doctor like Dr. Pepper is a doctor?"

by Allen Chace on Jun 5, 2008 1:39 PM EDT up reply actions

I must have been mistaken

Bradley’s name was mentioned in Mitchell List speculation, but I had forgotten that he wasn’t actually on the list. I can’t find anything tying him to steroids, so I apologize for defaming his honor.

We already have excellent defensive outfielders with Crisp and Ells, so hitting should be the priority. Bradley’s having a career season (in a hitter’s park), so he’ll be quite expensive to acquire. The Rangers aren’t competitive, so they can get a good haul for him by the trade deadline, and if not they can just hold onto him and pick up some draft picks. That’s not to say Bradley wouldn’t be a good option, just that I think he’d cost the Sox more in talent than Bonds would in money.

by 0157H7 on Jun 5, 2008 3:11 PM EDT up reply actions

I don’t remember him being brought up in the whole roid fiasco either. I also agree that the only teammate that I can remember him not getting along with was Kent. But Kent is, by most accounts, an asshole.

by MSsox on Jun 5, 2008 1:59 PM EDT reply actions