 |
You can never have enough pitching. You can never have enough pitching. You can never have enough pitching. You can never have enough pitching. You can never have enough pitching. (write this on the blackboard 500 times)
I doesn’t matter how many times you say it, you can never say it enough. This was reinforced to me when news of Curt Schilling’s injury broke. I’d been amused by Sox fans saying we didn’t “need” Johan Santana because pitching was already our strong point. “We have Beckett, Dice-K, Schilling, Wakefield and either Lester or Buchholz,” they’d say, forgetting of course, that Schilling and Wakefield have a ton of mileage on them and are coming off arm injuries, and that Lester and Buchholz have yet to prove they can survive an entire major league season.
Now we have the career-threatening injury to Schilling and suddenly, the rotation has more question marks than answers. Let’s pray Beckett, who wasn’t exactly an iron horse before coming to Boston, doesn’t develop any arm problems or blisters, or there’s going to be a lot more people than just me questioning why the Sox didn’t pay the price for Santana.
There’s a reason legit aces make big money. The Yankees will rediscover why when their young arms fail to last the season or live up to their billing. I have a feeling the Sox will realize the same thing.
What’s your take on the Schilling injury? Is he done or can he come back? Are you confident in the Sox rotation with both Lester and Buchholz in it? Can Dice-K live up to his billing?
Teddy
The A's seem to be shopping Joe Blanton around. I think that would be a nice move by the sox to pick him up.
A's were asking for Andre Either, Laroche and a Prospect for him from the Dodgers.
Blanton would be a more than adequate filler for Schilling in my eyes. However, I think the price would be too high for someone who's not a difference maker in a rotation. I'm afraid that after having been teased by Johan Santana talk, it's going to take a major move to get me excited about a pitching addition.
Well Teddy are you looking to fill a whole or find a difference maker. I think Blanton's 3.95 era (although distorted by that Gigantic stadium they play in)would be a nice # 3. The dodgers weren't interested because the A's wanted to much. The A's will lessen their demands.
Hey ! how about looking into an Arroyo trade?
Oh what a happy day. I hope to God that Schilling never pitches again. I hope he has the surgery and something goes terribly wrong and his career comes to a bitter end. Yeah great post season pitcher, speaks his mind, really genuine guy, Bloody sock heroics, Dennis and Callahan love him, blah blah blah blah blah. He is a media hound, a snitch, A blowhard, and an average pitcher at best at this point in his career. I hope his arm hurts so much that he can no longer write on his stupid blog
Well, I'd love a difference maker, because that's what they teased us with in Santana. I still think Dice-K has a chance to be a legit #1 type, though who knows. I'm also worried about what happens should Beckett go down for any length of time. Lester and Buchholz have all the potential in the world, but do you really want to depend on them in a market like Boston?
And you hit the nail on the head with Blanton in that ballpark. Put him at Fenway, and I think he's a true #4, though he would be the #3 on this staff.
The sky isn't falling yet. Don't need to make any knee-jerk reactions to the loss of Schilling although at this point the Sox should not count on him in 2008 and spend the Spring either readying someone who is destined for AAA in 2008 to be ready to pitch in the bigs in case of a Wakefield injury or a Lester or Buchholz collapse (a la Kason Gabbard last year) or scan the other teams in the Spring to try to identify possible help should they try to make a deal. Let's see how these guys fare in the spring before running out and trying to get someone else. Maybe the A's will lower their price but not so likely if they think the Sox are desperate...
EVERY team is in a pretty rotten spot if their horse goes down. Where will the Mets be without Santana if he gets hurt, the Braves w/o Tim Hudson, D-Backs w/o Webb, etc. You can hedge somewhat but if you lose that #1 you are not going to simply plug your #2 in, move everyone up a slot, and continue on as you were- even if they had Santana you couldn't say they could do that because Lester and the bullpen depth (Masterson, Bowden) would have been dealt away...
If they had Beckett, Santana and Dice-K, I wouldn't care who their 4 and 5 were. You could make do with a rotating group featuring Wakefield, Buchholz, Snyder, or whichever mediocre arm they could come up with. And if Beckett or Santana got hurt, then they'd be in the same situation they're in now...Matsuzaka as your #2 and a bunch of youngsters battling for 4-5 after Wakefield.
Honestly, DB, I was a bit concerned about the pitching before Schilling got hurt. Too much dependance on youngsters, geezers and Beckett, who's due for a bout with blister or arm problems. Sure, they're in better shape than a lot of their foes, but I'm thinking World Series and playoffs, not April against the Devil Rays and Royals.
I guess my point is that even without Santana a rotation of Beckett, Dice-K, Lester, Buchholz, and Wakefield is really not that bad - not with the Red Sox offense to back them up, anyway. If you're scoring 6-7 runs a game does it matter if you give up 1 or 4 to the opposition?
Will it make series vs the Yanks, Tigers, Angels, and Indians tougher? Sure it will but it's not like you're going to put up an automatic "L" just because the other team's hurler is "better".
Again I ask... Name me one team in the majors who can lose a #3 or better starter and not notice it in some way. You can't stockpile them to use on a "rainy day". You've got to build the best top-to-bottom roster that you can. It's not fantasy baseball so sometimes you stick your neck out and make a mistake (the mistake was, in retrospect, to sign Schilling with an arm made of spaghetti - his agent's words - not mine). I don't know that the non-Santana deal can be considered a mistake. Now had the Yanks got him AND Schilling went down- I'd be a little more worried.
I agree with what you're saying DB...just a little disappointed that a stud like Santana was so close (remember, they'd asked for Lester's medical records, a sign a deal was done) to their grasp and he slipped away...or worse, they let him get away.
They're still as good as their AL competition. They were better last year, though, and they would have been much better this year with Johan.
I agree. And maybe 'ol "Pasta Arm" will be able to come back for his swan song late in the summer to provide a lift (although I'm not betting on it).
Enough teams will fall out of the race that if they want to make a deal they'll find a partner. Find someone who's 2008 is their last with their current team and dangle Masterson and/or Bowden as long as they are good in the minors this year and someone will be available to them... At least it didn't happen 2 weeks into the season or something...
There is one thing beyond pitching you can never have enough of....young pitching! And the Sox finally have plenty of it! It is the most pitching in the pipeline since have since Clemens, Ojeda, Hurst, Nipper and Boyd of the early 80's. That's 23-26 years! I, for one, was really happy the Santana deal fell through. The price was way too high and the crop of arms is too valuable. Pitching takes too long to develop. Now there is Buchholz, Lester, Masterson, Ward, etc. in the pipeline. I'll save you the time of looking around the thin pitching staffs in MLB. The only team that rivals Boston's staff is Detroit. That's about it. That and if the Sox beat themselves are only the road blocks to the Sox repeating this year. Buchholz starts off in Pawtucket, Lester is your #4 in Boston. I'll take that over anyone's #4.
Welcome to the party, Southpaw. A bit late, but welcome anyway!
Now then, you yourself said pitching takes a long time to develop. So, how long will you wait for Lester and Buchholz to hopefully approach anywhere near the level of pitcher Santana is?
I, too, am looking at the Tigers, and I don't like what I see from a Sox fans perspective. The difference between their young pitching and ours? Detroits is established. Lester and Buchholz have yet to prove they can succeed over an entire season. Plus, Boston isnt' exactly the easiest city to prove yourself in.
I like the concept of developing young players, but I'm much more gung-ho about developing position players than pitchers. Pitching in Boston and New York is a whole different animal. From that Sox '80's contingent you mentioned, only the pre-juice Clemens belongs in the same discussiong with Santana. Hurst was very good, but the rest of the crew was your typical hot-cold mediocre pitching.