Yes, it's (already) March 13 and in the wake of a completely meaningless exhibition game, things are not looking good for Jonathan Papelbon's replacement.
Repeat after me: "It's only spring training. It's only spring training. It's only spring training." ...Now, because Borges is not clinically insane (presumably; I admit I'm not a doctor), he also includes some soothing passages, like:
Andrew Bailey is (repeat after me) the Sox' only closer. Think about that for a minute, and the sore lat and three scalded hits take on a little added significance.
One inning, good or bad, proves nothing this time of year. ... So three hits — even as loud as the ones yesterday — don’t really mean all that much.But then he cannot help himself, immediately following that with:
But if that's the case, isn't the same true for the three outs that followed?Borges follows it all up with a comment about Bailey's "seemingly fragile health". Again, this is all par for the mediot course in Boston, where, as our level-headed columnist puts it, "baseball and agita, even in the spring, often go hand in glove".
What is also strange is his comment that Bailey is the only closer, as if Boston will have to (OMG!) forfeit the ninth inning if Bailey is out of action for whatever reason. Just a few days ago, Bobby Valentine mentioned the possibility of Alfredo Aceves being used as the closer on some days, and Mark Melancon finished 47 games for the Astros last year - 10 more games than Closer Bailey finished for the A's. Yes, Bailey missed time last season, so his number of appearances were down, but as we have seen time and time and time again, just about any pitcher can be a closer.
But as we have also seen time and time and time again, with Camp Valentine being run like a well-oiled machine, everyone gripe-free and having fun, the team winning nearly every game in sight, agita must be invented if it does not actually exist.
10 comments:
Rays starter David Price suffered a neck spasm this spring while drying off with a towel.
What got me about this morning's coverage was how the Globe (ie Cafardo) totally ignored the visit of John Dewan (of UZR fame) to the Fort while both the Herald and 'EEI felt it deserved some comment. Last season's team defense not an issue for Nick? Or maybe if he ignores them new-fangled stats that "nobody" understands, they'll just go away.
What we did get from Nicky on Extra Bases was a blow-by-blow of Ozzie/Bobby--while apparently abandoning his live game-thread. And the Globe is trying out a pay-wall?
If yesterday was any indication of what will happen this season, then Pedro Ciriaco should be the Opening Day shortstop. Case closed.
Whenever I see silly nonsense like this in Spring Training, I always think of Keith Foulke in the spring of 2004. He was getting absolutely hammered that spring, and once the regular season began, he was literally untouchable the first three months. And how did that turn out in the end?
. And how did that turn out in the end?
Almost stupendously shitty, actually.
:>)
Borges must have been so wrapped up in creating worry that he failed to notice Papelbon got knocked around by Detroit in his last appearance. I know because I was there (and because his stats for the inning sucked). I guess that proves conclusively that the Red Sox were right to let him go after all.
PeteAbe projects the roster, with Felix as the #5.
I read this Herald article linked off Sports Illustrated earlier and rolled my eyes - typical Boston media, always looking for a crisis. Reminds me why I get all my Red Sox news/comment from blogs. I moved from England to California in November and have found a refreshing contrast that the Bay Area media are fair and supportive and actually seem to want the Giants and A's to succeed.
And how did that turn out in the end?
In the very end, fantastic, the greatest. But in the end as a whole, a complete heart attack. I couldn't stand to watch, I'd have to leave the room when he was on the mound.
However... fearmongering in March, because we've got ad space to sell.
And how did that turn out in the end?
I actually meant "2004", Allan. Should have been more specific, as we all know how Foulke's time in Boston ended. The Omnipotent Q regrets the error.
Post a Comment