2011 Boston Red Sox: It's not as bad as it seems!

Alright, alright, it's been long enough, enough has been settled: I can now talk about the season that was 2011.

Just today, it became official that Theo Epstein WOULD indeed be heading to Chicago to serve as the Chicago Cubs President of Baseball Operations, and Billy Goat #1, should the Cubs end up finishing third or worse in the NL Central, as they seem to have done every year since Steve Bartman. Have fun with that, Theo! While I am sad to see Theo go, it was clear with the fallout following the season that he would not be back. We have a great replacement in Ben Cherington, who, along Jed Hoyer (current Padres GM, who is set to become Theo's GM in Chicago) made one of the bigger trades in recent Red Sox history (getting Josh Beckett and Mike "World Series MVP" Lowell for Hanley "Bad Attitude" Ramirez.) while Theo was hiding in a Gorilla suit. (if you aren't familiar with this story: http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=51027) Cherington is an apt replacement and look forward to his tenure.

Theo's leaving came after it was announced that field manager Terry "Tito" Francona would not be returning next season. The move was made as a mutual agreement, but I believe it is more of Tito didn't want to come back, and the Sox brass were willing to let him go. To be fair, and I've been saying this for years, he was not that good of a manager. Sure, he led the Red Sox to their first two World Series championships in 86 years, but it's not like he was playing! I have consistently said over his years at the helm that he posses an inability to manage a bullpen, which has turned out to be quite an issue. His nickname of "Francoma" did not come without reasoning. I'm not sure who the next manager will end up being, but I sure as hell wish John Farrell hadn't left last year, for multiple reasons...

John Farrell was, hands down, the best pitching coach the Red Sox have ever had. I mean, at least in my lifetime. He showed signs of the makings of a great future manager, which he became last year for the pathetic Toronto Blue Jays. While he not only would be the answer to our current managerial problems, he also would've been great to have as our pitching coach, instead of the useless Curt Young. Sure, Curt Young had a great track record in Oakland (where he will be returning next year), but that could be wholly attributed to the fact that Oakland is a team that gets good draft picks, and has the pitchers while they are young and impressionable, before they are shipped out because Oakland won't be able to afford them. Well established pitchers like Josh Beckett and Jon Lester won't listen to a guy they don't really respect. With Young, this was apparently the case. This brings me to the next point: starting pitchers.

So, it turns out that Francoma was so lax in discipline that on off days starting pitchers would go back to the clubhouse and drink crappy beer (Bud Light) after the 6th inning. While I do not technically have a problem with players pitching on their off days, I think they probably should have remained with the team in the dugout, showing their support. Francoma was not a discipline man, and was very much a players manager, which is why this type of issue developed in the first place. Our next manager needs to be a good mix of fun and strict, an aspect that Francona was clearly heavy on the fun side of the spectrum. The guys I would most like to be the next manager are Joe Maddon and Buck Showalter, both of whom are unlikely to leave their posts (additonally, Showalter has shown distaste for the Red Sox organization, putting it lightly.)

I know that I have high hopes for Cherington and the Sox brass picking a new manager, and working out the drinking problems, and getting a good deal for getting rid of terrible signing John Lackey (unlikely), but I think things will work out because, really, things are not that bad. Sure, the Red Sox finished third and missed the playoffs. Sure, they have one of the highest payrolls in the league. But, it's not like they were terrible (with the exception of September). The Sox ALMOST made the playoffs, and only were eliminated from such hopes on the last day of the regular season. And it is not like they did not have some stiff AL East competition to deal with. Based on the fact that the Red Sox started off the season 2-10, went 7-20 in September and STILL managed to be in the playoff race until the very last day of the season should speak well of the team and their future, not negatively. Yes, this was the 2nd year in a row missing the playoffs and finishing 3rd, but I am not worried. The Sox consistently put out a great team that will compete for the playoffs until the very last day, and there is no reason to expect them not do so in 2012. Consider this: Jacoby Ellsbury had one of the best seasons in baseball, and he is poised to be at least half as good next year. And keep in mind, the Red Sox will get a much better year out of Carl Crawford next year (he can't possibly not bounce back). Additionally, the Red Sox still have Adrian Gonzalez. ADRIAN. GONZALEZ. Get excited for 2012.

Justin Verlander and the MVP Race

Well, we've entered the home stretch. The playoff teams are pretty much set, safe for the AL West, and who will end up winning the AL East (the loser gets the Wild Card spot). Even the AL Cy Young is pretty much wrapped up for Detroit's Justin Verlander. So, the thoughts on everyone's mind is the AL MVP race. The front runners are New York's Curtis Granderson, Boston's Adrian Gonzalez, and Detroit's Justin Verlander. There are other candidates, but these are the three most likely to win. Let's explore each of these players statistics.

As of today, September 9, Curtis Granderson is hitting .270 with 38 home runs, 109 RBI and 24 stolen bases in the potent Yankees lineup.

Adrian Gonzalez is leading the league in batting average, hitting .343 with 24 home runs and 106 RBI in the only-slightly-less potent Red Sox lineup.

Verlander is a pitcher, and those statistics cannot be easily compared to that of position players, so we will discuss Granderson vs. Gonzalez first.

With those three major statistics, it is pretty much a toss up. Granderson has many more stolen bases, and 14 more home runs, but Gonzalez is hitting a whopping 77 points higher than Granderson. Even the more advanced stats don't give you a clear winner here. Gonzalez beats Granderson in OBP (.407 vs .374) and OPS (.964 vs .945), while Granderson edges out Gonzalez in slugging (.570 vs .557). If you wanted to see what types of hits are making up these numbers, you would compare Gonzalez 21 more doubles (43 vs 22) against Granderson's 7 more triples (10 vs 3). Gonzalez is approaching 200 hits on the season, while Granderson is 10 away from 150. Gonzalez has about 50 more at-bats and 15 more total bases on the season. So, what is basically being shown here is that it is a wash, and could go either way, between these two players. However, there is that Verlander guy, who already has 22 wins, and could reach 24 or 25, if he's lucky. (He doesn't need much luck; you'll see why in a minute)

This season, Justin Verlander has been, hands down, the most dominant starting pitcher in all of baseball. He holds an incomparable 22-5 record, including winning his last 10 decisions. His ERA stands at an impressive 2.44, with an amazing WHIP of 0.91. He is also untouchable, with 232 strikeouts. These numbers have already wrapped up the Cy Young for him, and he figures to have two or three more starts this season to add to those numbers. He throws hard, goes long (4 complete games, at least 26 of his 31 starts have been 6 innings or more and he has pitched 229 innings) and carries his team. It can be assumed that the 5 starts he made where he didn't get quality starts were the ones that he lost. Simply put, Justin Verlander is absolutely filthy, and the best pitcher in the game, without question. If you think CC Sabathia has good stats (he does), then Verlander is godly. Verlander makes Sabathia look like a second-tier pitcher, which is a difficult feat to accomplish. What's more, is he the only guy in Detroit's pitching staff that a manager could turn to to pitch a big game when the Tiger's less-than-amazing (but still pretty good) offense can't score enough to win without a good pitching performance. Verlander goes well beyond that; every single time he steps onto that mound, the Tigers stand to win that game, regardless of their offensive production. 

Those of you not as entirely wrapped up in baseball's ins and outs like I am must be now thinking "Wait. Why is there any question about MVP? It is clearly Verlander!" You, my dear friends, are absolutely correct. Or, rather, you should be absolutely correct. The award is for the Most Valuable Player, right? The player that is more valuable than any other. I am a die-hard Red Sox fan, and even I would argue that Dustin Pedroia should not have won the MVP in 2008. Yes, he had absolutely phenomenal numbers, but his whole team was very, very good. Sure, they wouldn't have been as good if he wasn't there, but he didn't save them by any means. Heck, another guy on his team (Kevin Youkilis) finished third in MVP voting. So, you see now that the MVP award is not really an award for the most valuable player on a team; It is more like an award for the best player, and that is only sort of a correct definition for it. 

Even if you go off of the assertion that the award is given to the player with the best stats, Verlander appears the best bet. But here in lies the issue: Justin Verlander is a starting pitcher. Starting pitchers only play once every four or five days. When the sports writers across the country make their votes for MVP, this absolutely is taken into high consideration. Sure, Justin Verlander was the most incredible player on the face of the earth...but he only did it once every five days. So, although Verlander's stats are incredible, they are diminished by the fact that he plays five times less often than a Curtis Granderson or an Adrian Gonzalez. The stats are seen less impressively due to his substantial amount less games played. How can one be the most valuable to any team if they do not play more often than a maximum of twice a week?

With all the facts on the table, the voting sports writers have a tough decision to make. Do they give first place votes to a guy with the best stats, but that only plays every five days? Or do they give it to one of the two guys who are pretty much equal in their value to their teams? Or, do they give it to the Dark Horse of the race, Jose Bautista, who appears headed for his second straight year of leading the majors in home runs? 

Bautista's existence seems to only weaken Granderson in a battle against Gonzalez, as his home runs seem less impressive with a guy with more being in the race. Also, Granderson is joined by fellow Yankee Mark Teixeira, who has 36 home runs. Gonzalez also has trouble from his own team, with Jacoby Ellsbury and Dustin Pedroia also putting up incredible numbers that will warrant some votes for the lower places in the race. Actually, Ellsbury could even replace Gonzalez at the forefront of Red Sox MVP candidates, with a .317/25/89 line with 36 stolen bases. It is so close between a decent sized group of hitters, it is difficult to pick a leader. For this reason, perhaps Verlander will get more attention and take home the MVP, as he rightly deserves. But, keep in mind, the last time a pitcher won the MVP it was Dennis Eckersly in 1992. Eck is one of the best pitchers of all time, and is a Hall Of Famer. The last time a pitcher won the Cy Young and MVP was in 1986, when Roger Clemens did it. Does Verlander have what it takes to match The Rocket? Or, more importantly, do the sports writers have the gusto to give him what he truly deserves?