Wow, Dunbar's pitching has become a thing of the past even though they haven't played 3 consecutive games but once. Nice!
 

Wily Mo Pena:
.292/ .414/ .542

How is Arroyo better than Clement or Wakefield, exactly?
 

I didn't say he was better than either of those guys, although on many days he is. They've got Clement in the 5 spot, and in the 4 spot is Lenny DiNardo. Great for '07, but this is '06. (Even though I love Lenny, and I'm sure he'll keep us in games while he's in the rotation.) And if Schilling or Beckett, or both, go down, however briefly, believe me, you'll be wishing we still had Bronson to step in. I never understood this trade and nothing has made me start to yet. If you told me right now I could give up one of our many outfielders for any other team's ace pitcher, I would do that. Don't worry, I've got a lot more to say about this and I will.

All that said, we're still fine. I'm just saying, I thought we were fine before that trade.

And I'm not going to change my stance based on Bronson or Wily Mo's stats so early. But I thin keven staunch Wily Mo supporters wouldn't say those numbers you showed us really give the whole picture.
 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If you told me right now I could give up one of our many outfielders for any other team's ace pitcher, I would do that.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

So would I. Who's the ace pitcher?

I think that:

a) Wily Mo has looked really good at the plate so far
b) He's a project
c) Bronson Arroyo isn't that good
d) Lenny DiNardo's as good or better
e) If Schilling/ Beckett get hurt, we're fucked anyway

The trade was a calculated risk, which is why I think a lot of Sox fans don't like it right now. But it was a smart calculated risk, and the exact kind I think a smart team makes.

The point is, even if this trade doesn't work out on Pena's end, we weren't losing something we could not and can not replace. We have the money and prospects to fill the starting pitching role if like, three of our potential starters go down through trade, signing, etc.
 

Also, one more thing- when you said "4th starter," did you mean "guy who pitches 4th in line," or "4th best pitcher"? I'm assuming the anonymous thought you meant the latter, which is the conventional definition, and which Bronson definitely is not.
 

Let's put it this way: In my book, I would've had him in there ahead of Wells. Since they've got Wells 4th, that puts Bronson 4th in my book, which, if he were still on the team, he would be, spot-wise. My point is, while it's debatable where he fits in in the total order of all the pitchers, I just still feel like he was a necessity to the staff, considering all the injury possibilities, and that I just don't buy that he's definitely peaked.
 

All right, try this: The move didn't seem to fit in with the "win this year" plan. Why not keep an experienced pitcher for this season, see how he does, and get Wily Mo in some other way either mid-season or next season. How? I don't know, you're better with that aspect than I am. Even if Bronson had gotten worse this year, some team would've taken a risk on him next year anyway. And I don't see Wily Mo getting enough playing time this year for any team to want him more next year than this year, so we still could have gotten a slightly more experenced Wily Mo. You may have noticed that Trot still is doing fine, anyway. The talk of him always being injured is overblown anyway.
 

Teams do things that don't fit the "win now" mold fairly often, especially a team like Boston that's looking to balance the now and the long-run. What seems to have happened is that Theo, et al, determined that from nearly every statistical indicator as a pitcher, Bronson was a great bet to take a huge decline by staying where he was this season.

So, they decided to acquire a guy that had two things-
a) A very high ceiling down the line
b) could help us NOW against LHP as a platoon

Meanwhile, they had this year's potential Bronson Arroyo- Lenny DiNardo- waiting in Pawtucket. To their minds, I'm guessing, even if Wily Mo doesn't pan out, he STILL plays the Kapler role this year, and we have a replacement for Arroyo's innings anyway. It makes a ton of sense. Yes, there's the possibility of injury- which is a notch against the deal. It's by no means a perfect trade, so that's something to keep an eye on.

(Also, FWIW, save 2003, Trot's missed significant time to injury nearly every season of his big league career, and is already coming back from injury #1 (a really iffy one- groin pull). Trot Nixon absolutely needs a platoon partner, and carrying him on the roster definitely requires at the very least a modicum of insurance.)

The Wells comp is largely moot, too- he couldn't be moved, and he can't go to the bullpen. They tried to trade him, and if they had, I think you'd still have your boy Bronson on the team. He was too expensive to be attractive to a team like Cincinnati.

Bronson's an upgrade over most of what the Reds have, but unfortunately for them, that's not saying much, and fortunately for a team like the Red Sox, they have the resources to take on a project like Pena who can also get time in contributing now. Championship aspirants like Boston can and shold be able to find Bronson Arroyos- or relative replications, performance-wise- fairly easily. If you hold onto Bronson Arroyo, and he does in Boston what it looked like he was headed for, I promise you the trade that would have happened AFTER the crappy innings he gave us in 2006 would piss you off MORE, and would have come with accepting that mediocrity for ~75 IP.

Maybe he hasn't peaked. But maybe neither has, say, Kevin Millar. Would you have brought back Millar? No, because most of the available evidence says he's past his 2002/ 2003 salad days. If he goes out and hits 40 HR this year, well, shit happens. But taking that into consideration is part of every move, I think.

How did I get sucked into this argument again! :)
 

And to think, I tried to bury it with all those pics above, heh heh. Well, thanks for again attempting to clear it up for me. I can see the other side, I'm just not sold on it. And when I talked about "win now", I realize we are setting up for the future, and doing it nicely in tandem with also putting together a contender, but I just thought the move went kind of against the other moves, like getting a solid CF and intending to sign him to a multi-year, which we did, and getting Gonzo at SS, instead of leaving those positions to rookies.

Maybe that would be the balancing part. But still, if we do care do much about the future, we could have kept Marte and Hanley. If we were going to be stuck with very young unproven guys on the big club, I'd rather have them than Wily Mo, and just build for 07 and beyond, but while keeping Bronson to keep a sense of experience, allowing us to still compete in 2006.

Or something.
 

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Maybe that would be the balancing part. But still, if we do care do much about the future, we could have kept Marte and Hanley.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

True- but instead of going for the future in 100% denial of fielding a sucessful team in 2006, they turned those two into two players who are good now, and on the horizon- Beckett and Crisp.

Also, think I'll be seeing Pat the Patriot in my nightmares tonight.