Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: UFC 146 Results: Junior dos Santos TKO's Frank Mir

What About Edwin Jackson?

Edwin Jackson of the St. Louis Cardinals pitches in the fifth inning during Game Four of the MLB World Series against the Texas Rangers at Rangers Ballpark in Arlington in Arlington, Texas.  (Photo by Rob Carr/Getty Images)

[Update 3:08 pm] Jim Bowden reports the Red Sox have made an offer to Edwin Jackson, and "prefer him over Roy Oswalt." Read the latest on Oswalt courtesy of Ben Buchanan here.

---

Free agent starting pitcher Edwin Jackson is still jobless, so even after hooking Prince Fielder up with a mega-contract, the winter's work of agent Scott Boras is not yet complete. At this late stage, the chances of Jackson signing to any kind of surprisingly-large deal are slim, as budgets are mostly at their end across the league, and teams are starting to focus on what 2012 will bring. It's more likely Jackson has to take what Boras affectionately refers to as a "pillow" contract -- one that will give him a job in the present, and possibly set him up for a bigger payday in the future.

Another Boras client, Ryan Madson, ended up settling for one of these pillow deals with the Reds, after the only team willing to spend big money on a closer threw it at Jonathan Papelbon. Madson will bring be paid $8.5 million, months after almost signing a four-year, $44 million contract with his original team in Philly.

Jackson isn't as good as Roy Oswalt, and maybe not as good as Gavin Floyd, but at this stage, he likely would be cheaper than either: Oswalt is reportedly looking for around $8 million per year, and Floyd, while inexpensive monetarily in terms of the luxury tax, will cost the team in prospects. At the least, he is durable, averaging 208 innings per year over the last three years, and 202 over the last four, and his ERA+ since he left Tampa Bay is an above-average 108.

Should the Red Sox attempt to sign Jackson to a one-year deal to finish off their rotation, or is the risk too high that, if they were to extend a qualifying offer to him for 2013 following his free agency, he would accept when the league shows itself uninterested in his price tag once again?

Poll
Edwin Jackson over Roy Oswalt or Gavin Floyd?
Yay
371 votes
Nay
378 votes

749 votes | Poll has closed

Comment 165 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Edwin Jackson

is the best of both worlds. He doesn’t have Oswalt’s health risk or Floyd’s cost in prospects. He would probably cost multiple years (does anyone think he’d do better next offseason, considering the glut of excellent pitchers set to be FAs?), but he’s worth three years.

I’d be happy with any of the three, though.

by abbreviatedman on Jan 25, 2012 11:15 AM EST reply actions  

Frankly, so would I.

I mean, even if it’s a multi-year deal, I cannot remember the last time any team actually had too much pitching…

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:16 PM EST up reply actions  

Jackson has the highest upside I think

his stuff is ridiculous. if he figures it out he could be like cy young contender good. the best option of the three in my opinion

by camthomas on Jan 25, 2012 11:50 AM EST reply actions  

I could get on board

with Edwin Jackson being our third our fourth guy.

Winging It In Motown, Over the Monster, Liberty Ballers, and Buffalo Rumblings!

by Scott Kenny on Jan 25, 2012 12:01 PM EST reply actions  

I don't see a lot of difference in Oswalt/Floyd/Jackson.

Any of the three have the positives and negatives.

Oswalt has risk due to his age and injury history, but gives you a veteran presence. A bit of AL concern as well.

Floyd gives you consistency, but I don’t sense there is a next step for him to take to become a #2 type pitcher. Lower ceiling, if you will.

Jackson could blossom into Boston’s 2nd best pitcher, but could also struggle to get out of his own way some. He seems to be durable, no?

If you can get Crazy Ken to deal, Floyd may be the cheapest because we are talking about sending spare parts like Doubront, Bowden, Lars and a younger prospect. Or, Crazy Kenny may think he should get Lavarnway and Middlebrooks for Floyd.

And I wouldn’t want to sign Jackson to multiple years unless it was some type of Beltre contract where he can walk if he’s successful or he’s cheap if he craps the bed.

by cds7c on Jan 25, 2012 12:14 PM EST reply actions  

Oswalt should be the guy....basically he just needs to pitch until the All-Star break

…then Dice-K will be in line for a few starts. If the Sox can get 16-18 wins out this #4 slot, life is realllly good.
.
.
.
I know, I know…its the scotch that makes me post dreamy visions….

"You're either carrying a spear, or running from it"

by BigSpearDiplomacy on Jan 25, 2012 12:35 PM EST reply actions  

No doubt this is my first choice.

Let’s say Bard does well, but due to innings limitations is done by late August (or takes some time off once Dice K comes back, so he’s avaiable for the playoffs)…

You have this rotation through the summer:
Lester
Beckett
Buchholz
Oswalt
Bard (or whomever wins the #5, but for argument, let’s say Bard)

In August/September, you’ve got:
Lester
Beckett
Buchholz
Oswalt
Dice K

And come playoffs?

Yes, I know… I’m completely ignoring the injury risk of several of those guys, but if we finally dodge that bullet (after 2010 and 2011, aren’t we due for a healthy season??), that’s a hell of a rotation come September.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:19 PM EST up reply actions  

If he's that good, why do teams keep letting him go?

The White Sox went with a 6-man rotation last year and when they trimmed to 5, Jackson was the one they traded away.

When the Cardinals won the WS with Jackson contributing after the trade last year, why aren’t they trying to keep him?

I don’t know if it’s a pitching thing or a clubhouse thing, but everything seems to suggest we should go for Oswalt or Floyd over Jackson.

by dsharp on Jan 25, 2012 12:42 PM EST reply actions  

While he's good he's also maddeningly inconsistent

One top notch start, two decent ones and a blow-up……..shake, rinse, repeat

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 12:45 PM EST up reply actions  

Jackson reminds me a lot

Of health Dice-K. I know we don’t really remember what that’s like, but healthy Dice-K was really good 7 IP start or oh my god please take him out after 5.

by Marc Normandin on Jan 25, 2012 12:46 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah the Career

1.48 WHIP is not encouraging.

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 12:52 PM EST up reply actions  

Jackson's stuff is better than Dice-K's

but when he was in Tampa it always seemed to me that he seriously underachieved.

by flasoxfan on Jan 25, 2012 3:55 PM EST up reply actions  

Dice-K has real good stuff

He’s just seriously afraid to use it.

…even discussing him is kind of aggravating. I hope he is changed when he gets back from being hurt.

by Marc Normandin on Jan 25, 2012 4:00 PM EST up reply actions  

Hopefully one of the benefits of having Bobby V.

is his ability to coach Japanese players and connect with them.

by SoxAcumen on Jan 25, 2012 5:05 PM EST up reply actions  

In which case, after a successful finish to 2012...

… we’ll see Dice K extended to stay in Boston with Bobby V.

Wait… NOOOOOOOOOOO!

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:20 PM EST up reply actions  

Ok you got me there

I did not think that far ahead. Ha!

by SoxAcumen on Jan 25, 2012 6:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Does he have the same

Unwatchable tendency? Because if so, no thanks.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 6:30 PM EST via Android app up reply actions  

Yeah, comparing him to Dice K is not a good way to get me on board.

I still want Oswalt.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:33 PM EST up reply actions  

You can ask this question as:

“Why do teams keep trading for him?”

If you phrase it your way, then teams must have known something about Cliff Lee too.

by abbreviatedman on Jan 25, 2012 12:56 PM EST up reply actions  

Noone traded Cliff Lee because they had doubts about him. It was due to cost.

The Indians couldn’t pay him. The Phillies could have paid him when he was there the first time but they had the chance to get Halladay and had to send Lee to get it done. If that trade doesn’t happen, Lee likely would’ve stayed in Philly until he hit FA. Likewise, the Mariners traded him partially because they couldn’t afford him and their season wasn’t going well and he could bring back some good prospects.

I’m not saying that all the teams that traded Jackson did so because they doubted him, but he was inconsistent at times. It is well known. He has gotten better at that part, but I think alot of the trades involving him were trying to “Sell High” on him. In my opinion the trade history of the two but more importantly the reasoning for the trades are not comparable.

by The Name is Dalton on Jan 25, 2012 2:52 PM EST up reply actions  

And, unlike Jackson, when Lee helped the Rangers reach the World Series...

… they tried to extend him, but lost out to the Phillies bid.

There is something different about how Jackson has moved around.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:21 PM EST up reply actions  

The problem with signing Jackson, especially if he wants two years

Is he plugs the hole in our rotation. When Lackey comes back next year our rotation will be full, so unless we move Lackey to Wakefield’s role we can’t pick up that Hamels or Cain we all want.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 12:51 PM EST reply actions  

I'd not bet that either Cain or Hamels will be FAs next year

There have already been rumblings of a Cain extension and I can’t see Philly at least trying to sign Hamels

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 12:53 PM EST up reply actions  

I've also heard that Lincecum's extension means the Giants don't have money for Cain

so… shrug

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 1:06 PM EST up reply actions  

Isn't the Lincecum deal just the last two of his arb?

Not an extension? Since they have Cain for half of that time already, I wouldn’t be surprised if they extended Cain for a lower amount than paying a shit ton for Lincecum when he hits FA.

Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog

by brogshan on Jan 25, 2012 1:18 PM EST up reply actions  

I wouldn't be shocked either

but we’ll see.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 1:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Lincecum's extension just gave them cost security

is probably a couple million less than he would’ve made through arb. If anything, that probably helped extend Cain because they know exactly what they’ll owe Timmy.

Cain has said that he’d take a discount to stay in San Francisco. I’ll be surprised if they can’t make something work.

by wolf9309 on Jan 25, 2012 1:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Matt Cain will not be available

he is the perfect pitcher for that park in SF. I wouldnt hold my breath waiting for his FA papers to be filed.

by SoxAcumen on Jan 25, 2012 3:56 PM EST up reply actions  

You say that

but we’re almost in February and he has yet to be extended.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 4:29 PM EST up reply actions  

True

I just cannot believe they would let the guy walk…but i could be wrong.

by SoxAcumen on Jan 25, 2012 5:03 PM EST up reply actions  

What do people think the price for him looks like?

If it’s more than Oswalt, I’d probably go for Oswalt. I said this earlier, what I’d ideally offer him is a 3 year deal which pays $8mill/$8mill/$4mill, and where he has an opt out after each year. I think there’s a decent chance that we’d get a decent pitcher for not too much money for 2 years, and even less AAV.

Maybe I underestimate the market for him.

by wolf9309 on Jan 25, 2012 1:50 PM EST reply actions  

Isn't the asking price for Oswalt currently on the order of 1 year, $8M?

Adding another two years (with opt-outs) seems unnecessary, given the market.

by Tarrsk on Jan 25, 2012 3:47 PM EST up reply actions  

If we can't afford Oswalt and don't want to give EJ multiple years ...

Could Vasquez be a cheaper one year option at #5? I mean, he’s not great but neither is EJ and at least he doesn’t cost prospects ala Floyd. Obviously, I’d rather have Oswalt but if the money isn’t there, I think I’d rather commit one year to a guy who’s likely to put up a 4.5 ERA than commit 2-3 years for the same.

by 111SoxFan111 on Jan 25, 2012 2:02 PM EST reply actions  

Javier?

I believe his plans this year were re-sign with Miami or retire.

by Marc Normandin on Jan 25, 2012 2:15 PM EST up reply actions  

Vasquez has said he's retiring

wasn’t gonna go anywhere but Miami, and think he decided he’d prefer to hang it up

by wolf9309 on Jan 25, 2012 2:15 PM EST up reply actions  

On the plus side...

… the economy would probably see a significant boost from all the Yankees fans who would need new pants after the multiple joygasms brought on by the prospect of having Javy Vasquez face their line-up while playing for the Sox.

The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.

by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 25, 2012 3:50 PM EST up reply actions  

That's what I was thinking, after they got screwed by him twice.

They would love to see him in a Boston uniform, something I want no part of.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Vasquez?

Back in the AL East? I don’t want that for anybody

Quantum Woodworking: Hand crafted pens, bottle stoppers, bowls and more.
Check out our blog

by brogshan on Jan 25, 2012 4:11 PM EST up reply actions   1 recs

If it was a one-year deal I wouldn't mind.

Between Floyd, Oswalt and Jackson I worry more about Floyd and Jackson against the AL East but it’s a concern for Roy as well. I would suspect his numbers to go up once he starts facing AL East line-ups that have by and large improved since his time in TB.

Injury concern is there for Roy, prospect cost is there for Floyd. On a one year deal though, Jackson is a good innings eating option even though. That being said, his career numbers fit decently with the Red Sox 2011…Terrible Aprils, Decent/Good months in between and putrid numbers in September. That’s over his career though.

by The Name is Dalton on Jan 25, 2012 3:02 PM EST reply actions  

No problem with the Sox signing Jackson,

as long as it’s just a one year deal.

"Man you are one pathetic loser. No offense." - Lloyd Christmas
2011 Varitek League Champion

by Lloyd Christmas on Jan 25, 2012 3:20 PM EST reply actions  

I'd say Jackson is the best bet of the three

Oswalt has the highest upside and the best chance to put together an excellent season, but he’s also the oldest by a number of years and carries some injury concerns, not to mention he really seems like he doesn’t want to play anywhere but Texas or St. Louis (which is just a really horrible frame of mind for him, but that’s irrelevant to the current discussion).

Jackson has the stuff and body to be a top of the rotation workhorse but, as has been said to death, is maddeningly inconsistent. If he could be had at a similar price in terms of years and dollars to Oswalt, I would take Jackson. If he has a good-but-not-great year and throws 200 innings, something he’s done 3 years in a row, then he would be an excellent fit.

Floyd is definitely below the previous 2 pitchers. While he’d be the cheapest in salary, he would cost prospects and Kenny Williams has shown he’s pretty desperate to add impact prospects this season; he asked the Yankees for 2 of Dellin Betances, Jesus Montero, and Manny Banuelos for 1 year of John Danks. Insane. I would imagine Floyd would require an overpay and his ceiling is really just a number 4 workhorse. He definitely has value, but I doubt he would produce much, if any, return on investment for the cost of prospects. I would rather pay twice the salary and no prospects for Oswalt or Jackson.

If Jackson could be had on a one year deal, I’d say he’s the right choice and it’s not even particularly close.

Hi ho, Duke!

by The Duke of Silver on Jan 25, 2012 3:38 PM EST reply actions  

If we sign Jackson,

can we please convince Dave Duncan to come out of his break that he’s taking from coaching?

by aubatron2011 on Jan 25, 2012 3:52 PM EST reply actions  

Hopefully

He is an amazing pitching coach.

"I don't put any foreign substances on the baseball. Everything I use is from the good old U.S.A."

JVSM

Pedroya Lova

by Dustin's #1 Fan on Jan 25, 2012 3:54 PM EST up reply actions  

The thing about Jackson

is that, unlike Oswalt and Floyd, he HAS pitched in the AL East against 2 high power offenses (ours and our rival’s) when he was in Tampa. He has more upside than Oswalt and Floyd, but as said somewhere above, he will cost multiple years. I wonder if a 2 year deal with a relatively high vesting option for the third (300-350 innings?) would get the deal done

"I don't put any foreign substances on the baseball. Everything I use is from the good old U.S.A."

JVSM

Pedroya Lova

by Dustin's #1 Fan on Jan 25, 2012 3:53 PM EST reply actions  

I think a two year deal gets it done

gets him a job for two years and lets him leapfrog the Year of the FA pitcher.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 4:31 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah but he didn't do so very well.

In fact, he got hit pretty hard against all of the other AL East teams in the one year in TB he had that was even close to passable. So what does that “thing” really mean other than being familiar with the ballparks? It’s not like Oswalt hasn’t faced good offenses or pitched in front of rabid opposing crowds.

Plus, since he pitched there the division has added Teixeira, Granderson, Mark Reynolds, JJ Hardy, Rasmus, Wieters, Gardner, Swish, etc. That and Jose Bautista went from almost nothing to one of the top hitters in baseball. Cano has improved greatly. Adam Lind has turned into a 20-30 HR guy. Sure, there have been some hitters to leave, and Jackson has improved as well. But overall the line-ups he would face are as good if not a little better and he is not as familiar with them as you make him out to be.

It’s not really that much of an advantage.

by The Name is Dalton on Jan 25, 2012 6:59 PM EST up reply actions  

And Oswalt was pitching in Philly last year...

… which is almost as small a bandbox as that new Mordor.

I really don’t get the folks that would prefer Jackson to Oswalt… now, if Roy doesn’t want to come here, then I might prefer Jackson on a cheap deal, depending on what prospects we’d have to give up for Floyd or someone similar.

However, I really hope this public statement about the offer was to say to Roy… hey, this deal won’t last forever… go ahead and sign on board.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:02 PM EST up reply actions  

My guess

Is that it is twofold:
1- Oswalt being an NL Pitcher his whole time
2- Oswalt injury risk

Both are valid concerns and could lead one to prefer Jackson IF they are a similar price in $ on a one-year deal. Not so much a concern of quality, but just that Jackson would be the better chance of being upright in September. The NL-AL issue also has validity, but at the same time when Jackson pitched well in the AL it seemed like it was for CWS and Detroit in the AL Central’s feeble line-ups.

Jackson did have some decent starts here and there against NY and TB when he was in Detroit, but he also had a couple less than stellar. My point wasn’t that he couldn’t succeed, it was that line-ups change and we shouldn’t overstate it.

by The Name is Dalton on Jan 25, 2012 7:13 PM EST up reply actions  

I guess I'm not buying Oswalt's injury risk.

Last year’s injury wasn’t pitching related, and when he recovered, he pitched well.

Plus, his entire history is 180+ and only once was he under 200 in recent years (before the injury in 2011)… so we’re talking about an injury suffered cleaning up from a hurricane like it will happen again.

I understand he’s older (but not as old as Kuroda – but no injury worries there?), and a back injury as you age can be troublesome… I just don’t see the history there that suggests it.

And like you, I see Jackson’s history in the AL East as not all that great… so not convinced that Oswalt wouldn’t adjust to the AL East and perform at least as well as Jackson can.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:35 PM EST up reply actions  

Don't get me wrong

I don’t think his injury risk is as high as people make it out to be. And he did hurt it in a freak way. But isn’t that more likely to happen when you have two degenerative discs, meaning hurting it by just tweaking it the wrong way? I’m not a doctor or trainer so I’m not sure.

At any rate, I think he could still give us at least what he did last year which would essentially replace the innings either Wake or Lackey gave and would be of a higher quality. Plus, like many have said. He is highly, highly motivated.

by The Name is Dalton on Jan 25, 2012 7:47 PM EST up reply actions  

I just posted this...somewhere on OTM.....(?)

but I think the NL Pitcher < AL Pitcher is overblown. I reckon the having to face the DH instead of a pitcher is offset more-or-less equally by coming out of your “pitcher zone” to have to actually be on deck, bat, and perhaps even run the bases (in your fancy jacket) before getting back on the mound.

I bet it’s more or less a wash.

Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.

@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven

by Bloggy on Jan 25, 2012 8:36 PM EST up reply actions  

Except that recent statistical analysis doesn't agree.

Of the top of my head, without digging deeper, I can think of a lot of quick examples (Vasquez, Javier and Penny, Brad) of pitchers that did very well in the NL, bombed in the AL, and went back to the NL with success again.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 9:48 PM EST up reply actions  

Some of those examples can be chocked up to correlation, not causation.

Javier Vazquez, for example, had 3 excellent seasons with the White Sox in a very hitter friendly ballpark before being traded to the Braves. On his return to the NL after his miserable season with MFY, he showed the same diminished stuff and results for his first two months before picking it up in June. Each successive month after that held better numbers than the previous.

Hi ho, Duke!

by The Duke of Silver on Jan 26, 2012 3:21 AM EST up reply actions  

ARRGH Jackson is not "inconsistent"

This narrative has been done to death with no basis in reality.

Dave Cameron argued that Jackson’s closest comp is actually John Danks.

“Their average game scores for 2011 were nearly identical – 50.77 for Jackson, 50.67 for Danks. The average standard deviation for Danks was 18.61, much higher than Jackson’s 15.6. This suggests that Jackson was actually more consistent than Danks last year.

By Game Score tiers:

Starts <10: Danks 1, Jackson 0
Starts <20: Danks 3, Jackson 2
Starts <30: Danks 4, Jackson 4
Starts <40: Danks 6, Jackson 6
Starts >60: Danks 10, Jackson 9
Starts >70: Danks 3, Jackson 3
Starts >80: Danks 1, Jackson 1
Starts >90: Danks 1, Jackson 0

The evidence actually shows the exact opposite for 2011. Last year, Jackson was the more consistent pitcher.

This is kind of my point – the narrative about the two pitchers simply doesn’t match the reality of how they’ve actually pitched. People see Jackson as an inconsistent flake, but he’s basically been every bit as reliable as Danks has over the last three years."

also, obligatory pimp of my Jackson article from 2 months ago. http://www.overthemonster.com/2011/11/17/2569337/dont-underrate-edwin-jackson Despite the favorable tone of it, I actually do not want Jackson unless it is a 1 year or (very team friendly) cheap 2 year contract.

"We’re the Sox. Not Apple Sox. We ain’t no Barbeque Sox. We’re the Red Sox.’’ - David Ortiz

by L33to II on Jan 25, 2012 4:14 PM EST reply actions   1 recs

yup, if you look at their numbers,

Jackson, the last few years, is almost exactly the right handed Danks

by wolf9309 on Jan 25, 2012 4:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Hopefully we get Floyd or Oswalt

and it’s just a “rotation”

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 4:32 PM EST up reply actions  

I meant in addition to Jackson.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 4:33 PM EST up reply actions  

if so, spring trainging would get pretty nasty

how many pitchers are vying for an opening day roster slot?

by d.russ on Jan 25, 2012 4:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Ha ha ha!

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:28 PM EST up reply actions  

Could have saved around 5 million

if we had just stuck with Reddick.

Reddick/Ross would have been just fine.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 4:48 PM EST up reply actions  

But if Bard works out, which im not saying it will or not

if it indeed does, itd be almost the same as getting Oswalt/EJax/Floyd

"I don't put any foreign substances on the baseball. Everything I use is from the good old U.S.A."

JVSM

Pedroya Lova

by Dustin's #1 Fan on Jan 25, 2012 5:03 PM EST up reply actions  

But he has to work out, after not starting for over five years.

I’m not going to get into his results as a starter, I’m just pointing out that he has not started at all in five years.

If he had been a starter in Pawtucket before he was brought into Boston’s pen I’d be less concerned about this.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 5:16 PM EST up reply actions  

We lost Papelbon.

Reddick doesn’t help replace him.

by revived0103 on Jan 25, 2012 6:12 PM EST up reply actions  

We got Melancon

Papelbon might be a good pitcher, but he’s still just a reliever.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 6:15 PM EST up reply actions  

And closer is the most overrated position in the game right now.

So while we avoided the huge overpay to keep Papelbon, and let the guys that already paid for Lidge’s services (hey, how’d that work out for Philly) pay him.

Of course, we paid a price to add Bailey, and I’m not convinced that was 1) necessary or 2) a good idea… Beane has dumped his closer every chance he gets, knowing he gets more value in return, since everyone else overvalues the guy in that role. Then he takes another young guy, creates a closer… and flips him too.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:30 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah the Bailey deal was kind of a head scratcher

although I’m no fan of Reddick and figured he would have been replaced by someone else in a few year anyway.

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 7:08 PM EST up reply actions  

Right... instead, you traded away Lowrie/Weiland for a set up guy...

… and I know the injury history, but hard to see that we didn’t sell Lowrie low there. If that was the best we could do, we should have kept him.

Then Reddick, I think we sold high on… except that we sold him for the most overvalued position in today’s baseball… the closer, when Melancon would likely have done every bit as well, for a lot lower cost (prospects and money). Money, by the way, that could have been used for a SP.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:37 PM EST up reply actions  

It could be argued we sold high on Weiland and Lowrie

There is a very good shot they are never more than what we have seen

by cds7c on Jan 25, 2012 8:21 PM EST up reply actions  

Except that the return was a set up guy...

… and relievers are the biggest fluctuation from year to year in the game.

We won’t really know if we sold high on those two until the season is over.

Reddick, on the other hand, most of us thought was past tense with his lack of plate discipline, and then he put a good stretch together before fading in September… I’m pretty confident we sold high there, except for the closer return.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 8:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Do you assume that Bard goes back to the bullpen?

Cuz if not then we needed to replace a lot of production out of the bullpen.

by revived0103 on Jan 26, 2012 12:44 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm torn on this one.

I see the value he offers us as a starter, but I also think our bullpen would be lights out (without Bailey), with him and Melancon as the back end out there.

That said, I certainly realize that Bailey as a closer was a lot cheaper than filling another spot in the rotation. I really hope he pans out.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 26, 2012 1:57 AM EST up reply actions  

I'd take Jackson over Oswalt every chance I get this year

If both can be had for 1 year deals. Need those innings.

My Twitter @totheights

by totheights on Jan 25, 2012 5:37 PM EST reply actions  

I'd sign him to a multi-year deal (hopefully 2 years)

For some reason, Starting pitching seems to be pretty easy to trade away if you have too much.
Especially if it’s a short term contract
As long as we’re not talking John Lackey albatross money…

by CelticPride on Jan 25, 2012 5:38 PM EST reply actions  

Hmm, that's a fair idea

we could use him to rebuild the top end of our farm system. Although it would look bad to sign someone and then immediately trade him.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 5:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Not immediately trade him

Heck – we might keep him if he pans out.
But he fits our rotation at 1 year – 9 mill this year.
If he fits someone else’s at 1 year – 9 mill next year, we could sign him at 2 yr.s 18….

by CelticPride on Jan 25, 2012 5:54 PM EST up reply actions  

Yup, good idea.

And if we have a hole next year (like the two created this year by Lackey and Dice K’s injuries), we’d already have him on board, rather than dragging our fans through this laborious process of finding another SP to fill the hole.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:32 PM EST up reply actions  

When's the last time...

…the Sox had a…German….as a regular starter?

by Dale Sams on Jan 25, 2012 5:48 PM EST reply actions  

Does it Seem Our Of Character

To hear about the Sox ‘making offers?’ ‘Discussing’ sure, ‘In talks’ sure, but actually making offers without a positive response? To me that’s a little antithetical to the front office, at least the Theo front office.

I wonder of this is to let us fans know they’re trying, but they already believe they’re not serious contenders for Oswalt or Jackson.

Or maybe it’s January and I’m overthinking it.

by alfredo on Jan 25, 2012 5:52 PM EST reply actions  

Well, maybe this move is deliberately to get Oswalt to realize that his offer might not stay on the table?

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 6:33 PM EST up reply actions  

I think Ben tends to be more open than Theo ever was

though it’s not like he’s Kevin Towers there, saying everything that pops into his head

by wolf9309 on Jan 26, 2012 12:27 PM EST up reply actions  

KT is hilariously awesome though.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 26, 2012 1:09 PM EST up reply actions  

I would buy into1-3 affordable years of Jackson

Can the Sox get him at under market value? If yes then I think with their lineup he is a nice fit. Not holding my breath on DiceK or Lackey. I see the upside here more than the risk.

"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis

by Dave D on Jan 25, 2012 6:04 PM EST reply actions  

So, to the point about the 40 man being jammed...

… is it at all possible that we already have Roy signed, have made an offer on Jackson, and like the deal we have with Ross, none of it is “official” because we have to make a trade to free up the roster spots?

So, the rumor last night that we’re looking for a starting SS is the actual target to create the space on the 40 man, and we’re keeping these deals quiet, so that teams dealing with us for SS don’t realize we’re not looking to move those guys for starting pitching?

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:04 PM EST reply actions  

I think we and the media like to speculate - and often

This off-season crap was mo’ better before the dawn of the internet/twitter age. You just ended up with guys without a detective-like aspect on what’s going on behind the scenes. Sometimes its better to not know

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 7:11 PM EST up reply actions  

I doubt one of the million (ok not that many)

but the boat load of beat reporters covering this team wouldn’t be able to get the scoop that the Red Sox had signed Oswalt. That is kind of a big deal.

by aubatron2011 on Jan 25, 2012 7:24 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah, and the news coming out since I wrote that sounds like he's got it, but hasn't accepted.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:38 PM EST up reply actions  

I think it's highly, highly unlikely

we already know Ross is signed even though that isn’t official yet, because of the roster situation. I’d imagine at this point, if someone was signed, they’d want Red Sox fans to know ASAP to get us to shut up.

by wolf9309 on Jan 26, 2012 12:29 PM EST up reply actions  

This offseason has pretty much proven

that you NEVER, EVER give a long-term contract to any starting pitcher. You try to find ’em in the farm (Lester, Buchholz), or you wait until there is a bargain bin, and pick up one year people for $5-12m. Then you use the rest of your giant payroll to stack the offense, with players who are less prone to implosion.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 7:27 PM EST reply actions  

Also you don't Carl Crawford

you just don’t.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 7:29 PM EST up reply actions  

I still hold out hope that he'll earn his contract before all is said and done.

You know, an Ellsbury 2011 type season, on the way to a World Series ring… if he does that, all would be forgiven, right?

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Yeah I am with you

CC has to step up this season, he is a freaky professional. That has to mean something. If not they we can forget his 5 tools, its his head that is not worth the contract.

But I hold out hope he will step up.

by SoxAcumen on Jan 25, 2012 7:47 PM EST up reply actions  

Carl Crawfording being signing a player who is wrong for your park in every measure

and plays a position where you have the most depth in your farm system.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 9:18 PM EST up reply actions  

See I dont agree with that premise

He is supposed to be a professional athlete who can perform in any situation. I am not disputing his bad performance, I just cannot wrap my head around a guy who signs a 140+ contract and does not try and better himself to help the team. The only statistic that I care about is wins for the Red Sox.

My opinion has nothing to do with your analysis, you are correct he did not perform. However, if you are a man/athlete with pride, you step up and do whatever it takes to help the team win. I think CC is THAT guy and I am hoping he will step up after a piss poor performance in 2011.

Thats how I look at it, and if he doesn’t step up, move him, no arguments. I have the same feeling about Dice-K. You are paid to pitch, do it or move on. Hopefully Bobby V. can get to both and the Sox will have a fantastic season.

CC is still salvageable, if he wants it.

by SoxAcumen on Jan 26, 2012 1:45 AM EST up reply actions  

I agree.

I really believe that he’ll be worth the money we paid him by the end of the deal.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 26, 2012 2:09 AM EST up reply actions  

I don't believe that at all.

Although, I believe he’ll play better than he has.

Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.

@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven

by Bloggy on Jan 26, 2012 6:29 AM EST up reply actions  

Of course he'll play "better" he can't play much worse

but the fact is he is the wrong type of player defensively for Fenway’s LF, and the wrong type of player offensively for Boston’s lineup. We needed a high OBP guy who didn’t need to be platooned against left handed pitching and could hit a few out of the park, we got a BABIP driven guy who can steal a few bases and can’t hit lefties at all, who has historically had bad numbers in Boston.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 26, 2012 7:31 AM EST up reply actions  

I'm aware of that. And I agree.

But…he’s what we ended up with (Thanks Theo), and we’re stuck with him for the foreseeable future. So we have to hope we can get as much value out of him as we can. It is not inconceivable that he will have a bounce-back season and provide us with a great deal of value…even if it doesn’t validate his contract.

Let’s hope for this.

Hope with me, David.

Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.

@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven

by Bloggy on Jan 26, 2012 9:03 AM EST up reply actions  

The problem you have is most superstars

are going to demand huge long-term contracts (as we have seen this off-season) and many of them will/may implode. So how do you temper the desire to purchase the largest and most expensive toy knowing that it may break?

Josh Hamilton is a good example – he’s likely to demand a big payday, but is a huge risk for injury/decline in performance

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 7:31 PM EST up reply actions  

You do better homework.

Though, it’s hard to fault all the work we did on Carl, and I still have hope that works out.

However, as is noted in the article on the main page today… how good does that Gonzo deal look, now that Pujols and Fielder have signed their mega-contracts?

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 7:39 PM EST up reply actions  

Or, you just pass and on the superstars if the $$ and risk is too high

"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis

by Dave D on Jan 25, 2012 7:44 PM EST up reply actions  

Wait a minute, come on now....

I thought we needed superstars at every position

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 8:22 PM EST up reply actions  

I have no real concerns with this

being a playoff caliber offense, or at least I didn’t before Cherington completely screwed up SS and RF. All of my concerns are with the pitching. To me, the money spent on Zaka, Lackey, and (soon) Beckett are what will keep us below 85 wins. Crawford is a definite candidate for snapping back, and otherwise, there are no contracts with the offense that make me shudder. For the pitching… oye, plenty.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 7:46 PM EST up reply actions  

I don't.

I mean, it’s amazing to look at what this offense did in 2011, and then look at how much of that production (basically none at all) came from LF… er… I mean… RF. Well, actually… I guess I mean both.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 8:25 PM EST up reply actions  

Did you know that by wRC+ the 2011 Red Sox were among the top 15 offenses of the last 50 years?

http://www.fangraphs.com/leaders.aspx?pos=all&stats=bat&lg=all&qual=0&type=8&season=2011&month=0&season1=1961&ind=1&team=0,ts&rost=0&players=0&sort=17,d

And that’s with virtually nothing from two corner OF spots.

"We’re the Sox. Not Apple Sox. We ain’t no Barbeque Sox. We’re the Red Sox.’’ - David Ortiz

by L33to II on Jan 25, 2012 9:14 PM EST up reply actions  

Right.

And I feel like we had some other down years, like Pedey, and could see improvement from Salty with another season of development (or Lavarnway replacing him) at the C spot, plus Adrian Gonzalez another year removed from his shoulder surgery…

If Carl Crawford has a little bounce back, all of that would more than offset the monster year Ells had in 2011, should he regress some for 2012.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 9:56 PM EST up reply actions  

I think his HR will come down

and his BABIP was 0.336 and should normalize some, but I think he’ll still be a solid hitter. What impressed me the most was his major turnaround on defense

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 9:59 PM EST up reply actions  

Ells, I assume.

And I totally agree… I really hope we can find a way to keep him because I love watching him play.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 26, 2012 2:10 AM EST up reply actions  

I clicked that

and got the list for all-time single season WAR and then was happy to see Yaz at #3

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 9:17 PM EST up reply actions  

I was trying to figure out why Teddy wasn't on there

I feel dumb.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 9:22 PM EST up reply actions  

I think the "solution" we have out there is laughable

And I see no reason why Josh friggin Reddick is not starting out there. None.

And we’re no better at short.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 9:38 PM EST up reply actions  

+1

Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.

@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven

by Bloggy on Jan 26, 2012 6:30 AM EST up reply actions  

Schilling wasn't an FA

So, perhaps save the sarcasm for when you’re correct.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 9:40 PM EST up reply actions  

I always have trouble remembering this, since Theo wooed him over Thanksgiving weekend.

Something about him having the no trade clause, right? And the need to work out an extension, before the trade with the Diamondbacks?

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 25, 2012 9:58 PM EST up reply actions  

Pretty much, yes.

Schilling wanted to compete, so he was deciding between us and the MFYs. We won.

There are always exceptions to what works in these situations, but generally, throwing money at the Lackeys of the world is a disaster.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 10:15 PM EST up reply actions  

For the record, I'm not disagreeing with you.

I just also get confused about Schilling’s FA status that offseason.

I just love everything about him deciding to come to Boston, thumbing his nose at the Yankees when he won the World Series with the Diamondbacks, then the contract he signed with Boston with a bonus for when (not if) they won World Series (plural), shaking hands with the guys in the season ticket holders. I love the bloody sock and the fact that I got to see the last game he ever pitched.

He’s a blowhard, but I do love that man. I would absolutely love to shake his hand some day.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 26, 2012 2:43 AM EST up reply actions  

As I argued here

a year ago, Cliff Lee would have been cheaper than Crawford, and would have been a much better acquisition.

I don’t agree with you.

by flasoxfan on Jan 25, 2012 8:42 PM EST up reply actions  

Cliff Lee wasn't going anywhere but Philly.

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 9:23 PM EST up reply actions  

I had originally typed

“unless it is the absolute top of the pitcher pool”, but then I figured you could perhaps make a case that Lackey and Meathead were in that group. Though I would disagree.

Everything Must Go.

by Sean O on Jan 25, 2012 9:41 PM EST up reply actions  

Jackson

Absolutely prefer Edwin over Roy as Roy has too many health risk and Edwin has proven track record in the AL. As far as Floyd goes, only deal for him if we could dump Lars on the Pale Hose and not part with much more than say Bowden. Very concerned over what we are going to do at SS! Scuturo was never the answer. We had our guy twice I thought with Alex Gonzo, the best defensive SS in the league and he had power and hit in the clutch, but Theo let the guy go in favor of Rent a wreck and Lugo my god! And now we are waiting for a guy who plays defense like Alex to learn how to hit? Come to think of it, maybe we owe the Cubs compensation?

by Harryaz on Jan 25, 2012 8:13 PM EST reply actions  

I don't think even Kenny Williams is foolish enough
As far as Floyd goes, only deal for him if we could dump Lars on the Pale Hose and not part with much more than say Bowden.

To go for Lars and someone along the lines of Bowden, who has the POTENTIAL of being a major league reliever. Not for a cheap starting pitcher who has proven he can be a solid #4, and potential of a #3.

by The Name is Dalton on Jan 26, 2012 8:37 AM EST up reply actions  

Foolish enough????

You are probably right, but I remember Larry Anderson for 16 games in exchange for Jeff Bagwell? That was pretty foolish……………..

by Harryaz on Jan 26, 2012 9:34 PM EST up reply actions  

Jeez 579 votes in the poll

Do we really have that many folks coming by here that frequently or can you vote multiple times?

by BobZupcic on Jan 25, 2012 9:48 PM EST reply actions  

Oh shit, there's a poll?

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 25, 2012 9:51 PM EST up reply actions  

I just voted, and right now the vote is split almost even:

50%-49%

Ummmmmmmmmm……………

Galactus does as he pleases. Because Galactus is drunk.

@#$%ing Twit: @blogtard
OTM | Silver Seven

by Bloggy on Jan 26, 2012 6:33 AM EST up reply actions  

Vote early and often.

I think, if you vote before you login, you could vote multiple times, in theory.

Over 700 votes now, and leaning heavily towards evening out after Oswalt was the early leader… perhaps because he seems not to want to come to Boston?

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 26, 2012 9:27 AM EST up reply actions  

BLAAAAAAARGH

The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.

by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 25, 2012 11:36 PM EST reply actions  

OMFG

The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.

by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 25, 2012 11:36 PM EST up reply actions  

SIGN

The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.

by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 25, 2012 11:36 PM EST up reply actions  

STARTERS!!

The Year of Extreme Opinions
BLAAAAAAARGH OMFG SIGN STARTERS!!
I apologize if this post has offended you in any way. Please retroactively ignore it. Thank you for your consideration.

by nuthinboutnuthin on Jan 25, 2012 11:36 PM EST up reply actions  

You and me both.

In fact… I think it’s time to change my signature file.

I thought we’d never win it all. And then we went down 0-3 to the Yankees in 2004, and I thought it was the end of the world.

Wait ’til THIS year!

by AlohaSox on Jan 26, 2012 2:44 AM EST up reply actions  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP4pks9CtSE

"There's something out there, beyond the horizon in the corner of your eye. I'm going to find out what it is."
-Thomas Solomon, Gentleman Adventurer.

by TheLoneDavid on Jan 26, 2012 7:34 AM EST up reply actions  

From Yahoo Sports

—Red Sox GM Ben Cherington on the club’s lack of pitching depth.

“I think we have more questions right now than Tampa and New York, for example. There’s probably less competition for the rotation on those two teams. The Yankees made some moves to strengthen their rotation. Tampa has had a strong rotation. Ultimately, the answer will be written on the field. There have been very recent examples of teams that looked like they were going to be struggling for depth at this point in the offseason and found some ways to put it together and did a good job buying low on some guys and they figured it out.”

Man, I know it is not April yet but words like that make me think it could be a long season

"Man that ball got outta here in a hurry, you know anything that travels that far oughta have a damn stewardess on it, don't you think?" - Crash Davis

by Dave D on Jan 27, 2012 1:15 PM EST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to Over the Monster, an SB Nation community that delivers news and analysis while encouraging discussion regarding everything Boston Red Sox. OTM was founded Feb. 22, 2005.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Einstein_small
OTM Fantasy: Week 7
Einstein_small
OTM Fantasy: Week 6

Recent FanPosts

010_small
OTM Simpson Analogues
Pedroialazers2_small
The possibility of trading Kevin Youkilis
Moar_bacon_small
PSA vs. OTM Fantasy Smackdown Update
Small
The Curious Case of Daniel Nava
Rsz_ashleyspade_small
Top Red Sox Prospects
Einstein_small
OTM Fantasy: Week 5
Small
Mariano Rivera and TS Elliot and maybe Robert Frost
Small
Rivera has torn ACL

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

Yahoo_full_count

Managers

Red_seat_small Ben Buchanan

Twitter_eb_2_small Marc Normandin

Authors

Lowrie__1234972975_0178-1_small lone1c

Jddrew_small gizmosandy

Pedoria1_small Mattsullivan

Baghead-1_small Matthew Kory

Photo__2__small BrendanOToole

Cee_small Cee Angi