Theo Epstein's Luck Has Let Him Off the Hook

Why has Red Sox General Manager Theo Epstein been so let off the hook about the failings of the Red Sox 2010 season?

Yeah, yeah, I've heard 100 times about the team suffering a rash of injuries that made it hard to make the playoffs. Yes, it's indisputable that the high number of injuries significantly reduced the team's chances. Just having Kevin Youkilis and Dustin Pedroia, two of the Sox' key players, out with season-ending injuries, has been huge. And, yes, I know the sub-par performance of certain players is out of Theo's control.

But, let's be clear: Beyond the injuries, there were large gaps and flaws about the 2010 Sox in spring training, and new problems that emerged during the year, and, Epstein, in many ways, did little to address these problems. Indeed, if you look at the "big picture" of the 2010 season, Epstein has played a large, overlooked role in each phase of this disappointing season. First, during the off-season, Theo made his infamous remark - whether he was taken out of context or not - that he saw 2010 as a "bridge" year to the future. It's been hard not to think back to that remark because, ever since then, Theo and Company have made NO significant moves to improve this team's chances to win, thus reinforcing that perhaps they did view 2010 as a "transition." Theo was suddenly talking about how the team's better defense would bring more "run prevention"- a concept that many baseball writers and fans saw as a meaningless attempt to distract us from the team's lack of hitting.

Before spring training and after choosing to not re-sign Jason Bay, Theo chose to not add any new big hitters to the Red Sox lineup, which, if we all recall, was glaringly weak against the Los Angeles Angels in the 2009 ALDS. (The Sox got swept, remember?) Some baseball pundits (myself included!) thought the Sox needed to sign two new good hitters in the off-season - not just a replacement for Bay. Then, Theo signed Mike Cameron, an older player - past his prime - and gushed about how much Cameron would help the team's fielding from centerfield. As it turned out, Cameron fielded poorly from the start, and, we learned quickly, his season would be limited by a serious adominal injury. Also, Theo signed Jeremy Hermida, a reservie outfielder who had shown flashes of hitting talent, but, Hermida ended up contributing little.

Perhaps most importantly, Theo and Company signed pitcher John Lackey to a huge contract and third baseman Adrian Beltre to a one-year deal. Lackey, as it turned out, didn't pitch well most of the year. (He was average, at best) As of today (Sept..1st) Lackey has given up more hits than most starting pitchers in the American League --- not what you want from a supposed front-line pitcher you signed to an $80 million deal. I have a different take on Lackey than many. I think the Sox definitely overpaid him; however, when I watched Lackey perform at the end of 2009, he looked quite good. His fastball had movement and his curve was terrific. Well, guess what? While virtually no Boston baseball writers have pointed it out, Lackey's fastball has been subpar for almost this entire 2010 season. It has lacked movement, and, often, been hittable......but, my point here is that I don't "blame" Theo for much of that. He couldn't foresee that. I do worry that Lackey, with much "wear and tear" on his arm, may simply be declining and the drop in his movement may be a first key sign.

Let's consider Beltre separately. This is the move - more than any other - that has let Theo "off the hook" for 2010. Beltre has been outstanding - far beyond anyone's expectations - THE best, most consistent hitter on the Red Sox. There is NO way Theo Epstein expected Beltre to perform THIS well! Well, perhaps we should ponder the state of affairs if Beltre had had a more "typical" season for him -- meaning "average." You can bet one thing: The Red Sox would have lost at least a handful of more games than they have so far --- They'd have been a considerably worse team that likely would have dropped out of contention earlier in the summer. Beltre has carried this Sox team for stretches. My point is that if Beltre had not overachieved, Theo's lack of moves to bolster the team's hitting would have been far more exposed,and, he might have been held more accountable.

Beyond that, Epstein opted to have David Ortiz return, and, after a horrendous start, Ortiz has, to the surprise of many (including me) been a fairly good designated hitter most of the season. Did Theo expect that? I think, in fact, Theo and most of us, really didn't know what Ortiz would do; in fact, Ortiz couldn't hit the ball in spring training, if you recall. So,, again, Theo got lucky. Had Ortiz declined badly - which he very well might have - Theo would have looked much worse.

Staying on the theme of Theo's pure luck, a few of the minor-league players called up - like Darnell McDonald and Daniel Nava - performed better than expected for a while. Each thrilling game-winning hits at one point, and, again, fans were distracted fom focusing on the mediocrity of the team. Also, while some local writers have pointedly praised reserve player Billy Hall, Hall, in fact, is not a very good player. Yes, he hit some home runs that helped, and, yes, he played many positions, but, his fielding was poor quite often, and, more times than not, he was easy for good pitchers to get out.

Then, there's the case of one J.D. Drew, who, for whatever reason, seems to inspire Theo to have delusional thinking. Year after year now, Drew has had the same kind of "average" years, but he has not come close to earning his $14 million salary - which remains the highest salary for any position player on the team. Yes, he's a good fielder. Yes, he's got a good eye -- but, yes, he also hits into more weak groundball outs to the second baseman than almost anyone I've ever seen! It's time for someone in the Sox' baseball operations staff, or, one of their executives, to look Theo in the eye and tell him "Drew simply isn't as good as you think - period. Stop your stubborn denial over this!

I'd love to see Drew traded, but, no other team will pay his salary. The other night, in the key game vs. the Tampa Bay Rays, when Drew made an outstanding catch of the foul ball to right field -- a ball he should have let drop to prevent a run --- it typified Drew's essence: He showed a flash of his athleticism and talent, but, ultimately, it didn't help the team. To me, Drew will always seem to be a player with more talent than he shows. I'll always appreciate his $14 million grand slam in the 2007 playoffs, but that has been about the sum of his contributions since.

Back to Theo: I'm harping on Drew because, for me, Drew symbolizes Theo's "Achilles heel" as a GM. Theo and his baseball ops crew are way too hung up on stats, and, OBP is a prime example. Theo doesn't seem to emphasize raw hitting power enough and he de-emphasizes the importance of players' ability to hit with men on base. He's too wary of pursuing big name "star" players, who, he must be reminded, became "stars" for a reason. Instead, he likes signing reclamation projects and less expensive players with "value." He doesn't emphasize character enough, sometimes. (Example: Beltre has proved to be a very tough, gritty player but Edgar Renteria was overwhelmed by the pressures of Boston and guys like Tony LaRussa predicted Renteria would have trouble here) Letting Johnny Damon walk and trying to replace him with Coco Crisp in centerfield comes to mind as another example of Theo overlooking the need to pay for raw talent (like Damon's) and individuals with the right "chemistry" for Boston.

Of course, Theo and the ownership group paid an enormous sum to Daisuke Matsuzaka, who, at this point, even I have to say, seems more of a mistake. Matsuzaka, in 2010, has done a bit better, but, he still is annoyingly erratic. I've been a big supporter of Daisuke, but, I wouldn't mind if the Sox tried to trade him in the off-season to a team on the west coast. Matsuzka has been inconsistent for too long now. Just when you think he's over his bad habits - like walking too many players - he does it again in a big game. Will Theo be able to admit his mistake and get something back for Daisuke before it's too late? Or, will he have too much pride and hang onto him out of some principle - or in order to get a bit more "value" out of him?

Theo Epstein, throughout this 2010 season, seemed to restrain his impulses to invest and spend money on adding resources and improving its chances. Unlike in many other seasons, when he made major acquisitions at the trading deadline, in 2010, Theo did virtually nothing this year. And, from the spring onward, Theo "accepted" that the Sox bullpen simply was deficient and much weaker. Manny Delcarmen, Ramon Ramirez and Hideki Okajima had problems, early on, but, soon, we were all accepting that Daneil Bard and Jonathan Papelbon were the only reliable arms in the pen. Not acceptable.

In the recent all-pivotal series vs. the Tampa Bay Rays, a key moment emerged at the end of the Saturday night game. Clay Buchholz had pitched a beautiful game vs. Matt Garza of the Rays, who had also been superb. After Buchholz amd Felix Doubront both pitched the 8th inning and Bard pitched the 8th, manager Terry Francona brought in reliever Scott Atchison to pitch the 10th inning. The Rays hit a home run, and, in effect, ended the Red Sox season.

Why was Atchison even on the mound? Yes, you can disagree with Francona's decision to bring him in, but Francona has had tremendously limited options in his bullpen all season. Why? Because of Theo Epstein's decision to not invest in the bullpen because he didn't feel the 2010 season was worth investing too much in. Maybe fans would have gotten a more true picture of Epstein's role if he had come out to the mound escorting Scott Atchison Saturday night. He could have stood there when Atchison immediately gave up a home run.

Say what you want about the injuries to the 2010 Red Sox, but, they still had a good pitching staff - at least one that appeared to have more potential than it did. When a team has five good starters in its rotation, one can always argue that its GM should try hard to "go for it" because it's rare to have circumstances and luck result in such a deep rotation.

In 2010, Theo Epstein seemed to believe that, despite its rotation, the Red Sox had only a limited, small chance of winning it all. That's OK. I can accept that. I'm a bit tired, however, of everyone acting like if it weren't for the injuries, the Red Sox would have had an unstoppable team. They were flawed from the start, and Epstein played a big part in that.

Watching the End of the 2010 Season

I had looked forward to atttending my first game of the Red Sox 2010 season at Fenway Park on Thursday night, August 19th. The Sox were playing their last game vs. the Los Angeles Angels, a team that has fallen into mediocrity in 2010. In fact, the Sox, at gametime, were 9-0 vs. the Angels in 2010.

As it turned out, when I left Fenway later, I felt I had witnessed the end of the season. The game included several familiar themes: Josh Beckett pitched poorly and had some of his fastballs knocked around. The Red Sox could not hit at all against a good pitcher, Ervin Santana. The Sox bullpen performed poorly too.

Overall, it was a bit boring and discouraging to watch the Red Sox Thursday. Yes, they're less exciting without the injured Kevin Youkilis and Dustin Pedroia in the lineup. Yet, despite that, the team still lacks "punch" or electricity. Adrian Beltre was the only hitter who got me extra curious from my seat in close proximity to home plate.


The dynamic of the game was all too familiar to many others in 2010: The Sox fell behind by a few runs and you just didn't feel very confident they could mount a comeback. This has been a year when everything has seemed to depend on the starting pitching - and, besides Clay Buchholz and Jon Lester - the starting pitching has come up short.


Beckett has had a terrible year. Yes, he was on the disabled list for close to two months, but, when he returned, he displayed the same weaknesses he's experienced during much of his tenure on the Sox. He has failed to locate his fastball well and this has hurt him tremendously because he throws his fastball so, so often. (too often!) He's often left his heater too much down the middle and paid the price. Also, Beckett has often been unable to get his curveball over the plate; in fact, he seems to not even use his curveball as much as in the past. On Thursday night, he barely threw his curve until his last inning or two. He also still doesn't throw his changeup very often. Granted, it's not a high-quality change-up, but, it still could help keep hitters off balance.


Right now, Beckett is an "average" pitcher who the Red Sox treated like a "star" by giving him a big, four-year contract extension back in the spring. He's earning $12 million a year now, but that amount goes up during the contract time, I believe. It seems, now, anyway, that the Red Sox and GM Theo Epstein made a serious mistake to sign Beckett before they had to. His old contract was due to expire at the end of this season, and, certainly, his abysmal performance in 2010 would have impacted Epstein's thinking about re-signing him. I, for one, advocated that that Sox should wait until the end of this season to decide on whether to re-sign Beckett, but, the vast majority of baseball writers in this area recommended locking Beckett up for years.


The Red Sox also, of course, just signed John Lackey to a long-term, expensive contract, and, he, like Beckett, is pitching way below expectations. Lackey has given up more hits than almost all pitchers in the American League in 2010. His won-loss record is very misleading; he has received terrific run support and gotten some key breaks to win games he would have otherwise lost. All season, the key to Lackey's mediocrity has been the lack of movement on his fastball. For some reason, his fastball, also a key pitch in his arsenal, has lacked the same zip it has had in the past. The result has been that often when Lackey has left fastballs around the strike zone, opposing hitters have smacked them all over the park.


So, Beckett and Lackey, two likely fixtures in the rotation for the next few years, have been disappointing not only in 2010, but, because they've shown troubling tendencies that might be difficult to reverse in the future. I suppose the only consolation here is that both these guys seem to love winning and have some "fight" and motivation to work on improving their mechanics so they can return to winning ways.

The Sox simply don't have the talent to keep up with the Tampa Bay Rays or the NY Yankees for the weeks remaining in the season. The team has had an extraordinary number of injuries and the injuries alone probably would have kept them from competing in the playoffs. When you then factor in the poor performances of Beckett, Lackey and others, it's been amazing the Sox have done as well as they have.

The question now is: Will the Red Sox make some significant moves to improve the team for 2011? The team didn't do much to avoid some of the likely problems of 2010 (such as the bullpen and gaps in the hitting lineup) It would seem they'd feel some pressure to shake things up and add a few talented players for next season.

There are so many other problems facing the Sox:

• Manny Delcarmen seems to have lost his effectiveness. Perhaps it's related to past injuries, but, unless he can find solutions to his serious problems, he should not be allowed a slot in the bullpen in 2011.
• Hideki Okajima also just lost his way this season. Injuries seemed a more likely explanation for his troubles, but, it's unclear if he can return to his terrific form in 2007 or even 2008.
• Jonathan Papelbon must find a way to get the old zip back in his fastball, or, he will continue to decline. His salary has slowly risen as a result of his choosing to submit to the arbitration process, and, now, he earns more than the quality of his pitching. It's unclear Papelbon can get back his "giddy-up," but, it appears he'll only remain on the team one more season (2011) at best. He may be traded in the upcoming offseason.
• The lack of other good relief pitchers: The Sox should not be relying on guys like Scott Atchison, Dustin Richardson or Michael Bowden. Atchison has had a few good outings, but a number of lousy ones too. Bowden is a kid who needs more work in the minors. I ask anyone: Would these three show up in the Yankee bullpen? No way.
• The Red Sox must decide what they want to do with Jacoby Ellsbury. The relationship between Ellsbury and the Sox may now be too damaged to repair. I don't think Ellsbury is a good enough hitter to worry too much about losing, anyway, but, either way, the Sox need to regain the trust of Ellsbury and vice versa.
• Regarding JD Drew, I guess the only thing they can do is wait for his giant mistake of a contract to end, but, what a Big Mistake it was for Theo to ever sign this guy! Drew has had an even more disappointing year than his past few - but I barely have noticed the difference. He just doesn't do enough to help the team - period. He grounds to the second-baseman constantly. He takes too many pitches. He chokes in the clutch. He just isn' that good. I can't wait for this guy to leave this team!
• The Sox have a very tough decision on whether to keep David Ortiz, whose contract expires at the end of this season. The Sox have an option to bring Ortiz back for one year, but he wants to sign a deal for more than one year. I love Big Papi, but, I have to say I think the time has probably come to cut ties with him. He's getting a bit older, and, despite having a decent year, his skills are more limited. He doesn't deserve 12 million a year any longer. This one is very hard because of Papi's incredibly huge role in bringing the 2004 title to Boston after 86 years, but, maybe, it's time to start a new chapter without him. Put it this way: I'd keep Ortiz only if he meets the Sox half way - and accepts a shorter deal.
• The Sox must decide whether to bring back Beltre. All season, all the baseball writers assumed the team would never pay Beltre for a new deal after 2010. Now, it doesn't seem such a sure thing because Beltre has excelled at Fenway. He carried the team this year. If Beltre and his agent, Scott Boras, can be a bit reasonable and compromise, I'd consider keeping him......but, will Boras accept anything but a giant salary after Beltre's year? Not likely........leaving the Sox without a third baseman, and, without his superb hitting.
• The Sox should find a way to let go of Tim Wakefield once and for all. He can't pitch that well anymore and he also can't stay healthy. The Sox need to cut ties with Wake.

The list goes on and on. In the end, however, I'll always think back on the 2010 season as a "bridge year" -- just as Theo Epstein clumsily labled it last winter. It seemed like a wasted, lost season in many ways. Like a season the team was simply waiting to end. Maybe, in a strange way, it was better to have all the injuries come during a year the team didn't expect to win it all.

Can Papelbon Get His Giddy-Up Back?

(Note: This marks my re-activation of this Red Sox blog after nearly a year of my posting on another baseball blog called "Cub Fan, Hub Fan." On that blog, which I shared with a Chicago Cubs fan, I wrote the same commentary and analysis of the Red Sox that I did here in 2009. My goal, again, is to focus on aspects of the Red Sox that often go uncovered by the mainstream press).

Last year, throughout the Red Sox' 2009 season, I raised questions about the performance of Jonathan Papelbon, who has been the team's outstanding closer since 2006. I noticed, early on, that Papelbon's fastball lacked some of its old "late life" or "giddy-up" that has always made Papelbon so effective. I wrote about how Papelbon was, apparently, trying a new motion to preserve his arm strength. As the season progressed, I noticed - like many fans - that hitters fouled off far more pitches vs. Papelbon and that he often threw strikes that caught too much of the plate. But, I also pointed out that Papelbon's success appeared dependent on whether or not his fastball had "giddy-up" during a particular outing. I recalled that in Papelbon's earlier years, his location didn't matter as much because his fastball was so explosive that many hitters simply couldn't touch it. (My guess is I wrote more about Papelbon's loss of late movement on his fastball than almost any of the many Sox bloggers all over Red Sox Nation).

In the last game of the season, Papelbon blew Game 3 of the ALDS vs. the LA Angels of Anaheim and I, for one, was not that surprised because of his erratic ability to generate sufficient movement on his heater.

Now, in 2010, it has been the same storyline: For much of the season, Papelbon's fastball has lacked the old "late life" and he has been far more hittable than usual. Yet, Boston's baseball writers have spent very little time or space trying to point out the obvious about the deterioration in Papelbon's fastball. They keep writing: "What's wrong with Papelbon?" as if it's a mystery. They don't appear interested in observing or sharing what they see on the mound, or, perhaps they don't even pay enough attention to notice the differences.

Yesterday, on Aug. 12 of the 2010 season, Papelbon had one of his most disastrous outings when he blew his sixth save against the Toronto Blue Jays. Again, his fastball - while reaching speeds of 98 or 99 mph on the radar gun, was very hittable. Yes, part of Papelbon's problem was a lack of command: He left most of his pitches up in the zone. But, the bigger problem was his fastball lacked "giddy-up" and Toronto's hitters had no trouble whacking the ball.

Beginning yesterday and continuing in this morning's Aug. 13th newspapers, the coverage of Papelbon has focused on his unusual string of blown saves and overall decline, but, it has not focused on the key explanation for his troubles on the mound. It is all about the loss of movement on his fastball.

And, it could be an even more serious problem than the Red Sox have admitted thus far.

Think about it: First, in the past - like back in the 2008 season, for instance, my guess is that Papelbon would, in some outings, have better movement on his fastball than in others, but, overall, he had enough "late life" to continue to dominate hitters much of the time. In the 2009 season, Papelbon couldn't always throw the ball with "late life" and he had to work much harder to close out games. He walked more hitters. Often, they fouled off pitches that they used to swing and miss at. Now, in a further deterioration, Papelbon is often, again, unable to find the "late life" on his fastball, but, this season, he's experienced the problem in some big games and blown six games -- more than in any other season.

Can Papelbon get his old fastball back? It remains unclear. Even in recent weeks, there have been a few occasions when Papelbon HAS thrown the ball hard - with movement - and looked like his old self. But there have been other mediocre appearances and some awful ones too.

It seems to me that Papelbon has been going through a transition. Sometime before the 2009 season, he began pitching in a new motion aimed at sustaining his arm strength for the duration of the season. Why? While the Red Sox didn't seem eager to discuss the details of Papelbon's arm condition, they spoke about his goal of staying strong. Yet, later in 2009, I recall Papelbon saying, on one occasion, something to the effect that because he had pitched with that more "leg-driven" motion, he felt he could "let loose a bit more then. I noticed, he pitched several games with more of his old "giddy-up" than previously in 2009. Later, in the playoffs, he struggled again, but, I wondered what was going on with his arm.

I still wonder about Papelbon's arm. Is he more fragile than we think? I've vaguely noticed, a few times, that it seems sometimes when he gets the best "late life" on his heater, he's throwing the ball as if he's using more of his arm. I cannot explain it in detail, but the important part is that I think Papelbon varies his motion a bit when he wants to try more desparately to bring more movement.

Why am I writing about all these details? Because Papelbon is at a crossroads now with the team - and, it's coinciding with the team clinging on to slim hopes of still earning a wild card playoff berth. Baseball writers and fans are questioning Papelbon more than ever before. Some wonder if setup pitcher Daniel Bard should replace Pap as the closer. Many are speculating that Papelbon may be traded in the offseason because he'll become eligible for free agency after the 2011 season and the Red Sox might be unlikely to pay him the salary he demands.

At the moment, Papelbon, undoubtedly, is focusing more on his day-to-day pitching than his future. He must try hard to keep his confidence up despite the cumulative struggles.

By the time the season is over, I hope that one of the talented Boston baseball writers will tell us more of the whole story of what's been going on with Jonathan Papelbon. It's inexcusable to hear Boston sportswriters simply dwell on Papelbon's bad outcomes without providing any reporting on the actual reasons for the changes in his pitching.

It's not impossible for baseball writers to talk to enough players, coaches, pitchers - on or off-the-record - to get more comments on Papelbon's status. And it's surely not possible for reporters to pay more attention to what's happening when he's on the mound.

Papelbon has been the best closer I recall ever seeing in Boston. At his best, he's been close to "a sure thing" in the 9th inning, confidently blowing the ball by the best hitters in baseball. I don't think he's "done" all of a sudden, but, maybe he needs to rest his arm. I don't know. What I do know is that I expect more of an explanation from Boston baseball writers.

Can Papelbon get his "giddy-up" back? It's a simple question that no one seems able to answer as the 2010 season winds down.

.