Those new Red Sox (part 2 - I felt guilty giving up half way through)

Pitching

(At some point you will catch on to the fact that I like tables!)

	ERA	IP	H	ER	BB	SO	WHIP	BB/9	K/9
#1	3.90	217.0	193	94	61	227	1.17	2.53	9.41
#2	3.73	195.2	203	81	20	101	1.14	0.92	4.65
#3	5.42	182.2	224	110	71	105	1.61	3.50	5.17
#4	3.68	181.0	155	74	77	190	1.28	3.83	9.45

So you have to choose 2 of these 4 for your 2005 rotation - which do you choose? I guess there is one obvious strikeout - does anyone really want pitcher #3? Well one team did and they paid a heck of a lot of money for him. Now Derek Lowe most likely isn't as bad as his 2004 regular season numbers indicate, and my big fear is that D-Lowe realized in the post season that a little bit of preparation might help him out here and there, and that the 2005 Lowe is closer to the 2002 Lowe than the 2004 Lowe.... but thankfully the Sox won't be paying him $9M per to find out.

If ERA is your bag, #2 and #4 are your choices, strikeouts? #1 and #4, walks? #1 and #2 - really all 3 of the remaining pitchers are good, better than average pitchers.

If I add this guy, it all changes right?

#45

2.07

213.1

160

49

37

313

0.92

1.56

13.2

Yep, I would take #45, #45 and then, as insurance, a little bit more of #45. Sadly, 1999 Pedro is no longer with us, and it is hard to believe that the Mets will even get pitcher #1 for the 4 years of his contract. Pedro is the greatest pitcher I have ever witnessed live - 14 Blue Jays would agree with me, but he has been declining for a number of years, and I am not unhappy with the Sox choice of pitchers #2 and #4 - Wells and Clement respectively.

Are the Sox better off with Wells and Clement than Pedro and Lowe - it is difficult to argue that they are worse off, and if they are no worse off, then we are at least in with the chance to repeat 2004.