By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Red Sox television analyst Jerry Remy, out since May 28 because of illness, said he will return to the broadcast booth Tuesday, when the Sox play the Colorado Rockies at Fenway Park.

Remy said on a conference call Wednesday afternoon that he was initially absent from NESN's telecasts because of allergies. That turned into pneumonia, and after antibiotics didn't help, he was hospitalized for five days.

“It’s hard, because the same thing has happened three years in a row," he said. "I’ve come down with these allergies, and right now we’re in the process of trying to find what I’m allergic to, what’s starting this stuff.

"Obviously my lungs are compromised because of having cancer twice. Every time I have an illness, it seems to gravitate to my lungs, and that makes things more complicated. It’s frustrating, but yet on the other hands things could be much worse.’’

The absences of the popular Remy are always concerning. He twice has been treated for lung cancer and has battled depression. He hadn't offered an update on his status since June 5, when he revealed on Twitter that he was suffering from pneumonia.

Thx for your thoughts-I've caught a little pneumonia and it has to run it's course-it's NOT due to anything else-hope to be back soon-Jerry

— Jerry Remy (RemDawg) (@Jerry_Remy) June 5, 2013

"Everything I said at the beginning was true,'' said Remy. "I was working a Sunday game [May 26 versus Cleveland] and did have an allergy attack. I thought that that would improve after a couple of days. It actually got worse the Monday night that I worked. I went to the doctor the following day, and I was told at that time I had pneumonia.’’

He was put on oral medication, but Remy said his body rejected the antibiotics. When he began to feel worse, he was admitted to Massachusetts General Hospital.

“Within 48 hours, that made a tremendous difference,’’ said Remy, who received an IV of antibiotics during his five days at Mass General, "along with the usual hospital stuff."

But in the days after being discharged, he said, he still felt lethargic and wasn’t quite ready to return to the booth.

“The club was on the road at the time, so the doctors felt it best that I not go on the road anyway,’’ Remy said.

He will return with no restrictions Tuesday. Remy, who will have missed 23 games through Wednesday night, said he plans to continue to work a full schedule.

“I missed doing my job, and I’m thankful for NESN for being so understanding about everything I’ve been through," he said. "I’m looking very much forward to getting back into the booth and following this club to the playoffs.’’

He did get some good news while he was hospitalized.

“The results of the radiation treatment were very, very good,’’ he said. “So that’s a bit of a load off my mind.’’

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I'll always remember the 1998-99 Red Sox teams among my favorites. Oh, you know they were flawed ball clubs -- did Dan Duquette ever bring in a presumed No. 2 starter whose shoulder wasn't held together by duct tape, yarn, and half-chewed Dubble Bubble? -- but they were feisty and fun, led by Pedro Martinez and Nomar Garciaparra, who electrified Fenway like few others before or since.

The ultimate prize eluded them, as it had so many Red Sox forebears, what with the mighty Jeter-Williams-O'Neill Yankees at the peak of their dynastic powers at the time. The '98 club had more pure talent -- former MVP Mo Vaughn, closer Tom Gordon, Dennis Eckersley in his 24th and final season -- but the '99 team advanced farther despite a vibe that often felt like Nomar, Pedro and 23 role players against the world.

I bring this up because there's a pleasant development occurring now that reminds me of one of the unexpected joys of that '99 season.

Nick Cafardo wrote an interesting piece earlier this week comparing Mike Carp's torrid recent hitting -- he entered Tuesday's doubleheader with a 1.065 OPS for the season and a ridiculous 1.303 in June -- to David Ortiz's emergence in 2003.

To me, though, it's much more reminiscent of Brian Daubach's emergence from obscurity in '99. Carp is 27, the same age Daubach was that season. He's never been a premier prospect but has consistently put up good numbers in the minor leagues. He was discarded by a team, the Mariners, who have struggled to find offense, just as Daubach was dismissed by the 54-win Marlins following a 1998 season in which he hit 35 homers in Triple A.

While Jose Offerman was ostensibly brought in to replace Vaughn's on-base percentage after he left for Anaheim as a free agent, it was Daubach who did the most to replace his slugging, especially in the season's first half, when he had a .925 OPS:

And here's Carp so far, for comparison's sake:

Not exactly a mirror image -- Carp slumped in May, while Daubach didn't until much later -- but both were unexpected offensive forces for prolonged lengths.

It's funny, I actually remembered Daubach having a brilliant first half and falling off the cliff in the second, but without debate August was his best month.

It was also the month in which he produced the most memorable moment during his four-plus respectable seasons with the Red Sox, a run that included four 20-homer seasons and -- bet you forgot this -- a World Series ring for his 86 plate appearances in '04.

Remember it? The date was Aug. 16. Oakland led, 5-3, and the Sox had the bases full and Daubach at the plate in the bottom of the ninth. Tim Worrell was on the hill, and the A's were one strike away from tying the Red Sox for the wild card lead.

Daubach had just missed -- and I mean just missed, by a foot if that -- a walk-off grand slam, the drive ducking inside the Pesky Pole rather than curling around it. Here's Gordon Edes's account in the next morning's Globe of what happened next:

Daubach, after fouling off five consecutive pitches with the bases full, drove Worrell's next pitch the opposite way, high off the Monster. Darren Lewis, who was on third base, scored. Butch Huskey, who was on second, scored. And Jose Offerman, who took off from first as Worrell released his changeup, crossed the plate with the run that gave the Sox a 6-5 win over the Oakland Athletics, one that resonated with meaning far beyond its immediate impact on the wild card race.

"It's hard even to describe, when you think about where I came from," said Daubach, who didn't miss a backroads whistlestop on his long, improbable trip to the big leagues. "You do that in the minor leagues, you do it in front of maybe a thousand people. Nothing compares to winning a game in Boston, in the bottom of the ninth."

The moment would have been special had Daubach not endured so much frustration and rejection along his journey to the big leagues. But his back story made it even better, because you knew it was savored, appreciated.

Like Carp now, he was an underdog who probably should have received a real chance well before he got one. Now, just as it was then, it's cool to watch a deserving player seize it when it finally comes around.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I love the optimism in Major League Baseball's amateur draft, the hope that comes with having, say, the seventh pick and realizing that the likes of Clayton Kershaw, Troy Tulowitzki, Prince Fielder, and Matt Harvey all arrived in pro ball via that very draft position.

But I'm also a realist, and I recognize that for all of the MLB Network's effort into turning it into an event like the annual NBA and NFL drafts, the gratification will come years down the road if it ever comes at all. Matt LaPorta was a No. 7 overall pick. So was Matt Harrington, Dan Reichert, Matt White, and our old friend Kyle Snyder.

Trey Ball, the Red Sox' pick in that spot Thursday night, may be a future ace, the next Jon Lester or Bruce Hurst. He also may be the next John Curtice, a first-round washout who was barely the first John Curtice.

Ball is an 18-year-old pitcher out of high school from the Midwest. He's gifted, but he's a long, long way from the big leagues. To wit: The most frequent comparison you heard for him Thursday night was Henry Owens -- a very promising lefthander in the Red Sox system who hasn't thrown a pitch above Single A yet.

So instead of throwing a few adjectives against the wall and pretending I have any clue what Ball will be five seasons from now, I figured I'd take a relevant trip in the Jerry Trupiano Way-Back Machine instead.

Using the Baseball Hall of Fame's addictive Diamond Mines scouting data base, I went back and looked at what scouts said about past Red Sox first-round picks at the time they were drafted or shortly after they began their professional careers.

While the results aren't as thorough as I'd have liked -- I couldn't find a single report for a Red Sox No. 1 pick after 1997, which leaves out the likes of Jacoby Ellsbury, Clay Buchholz, Daniel Bard, and Craig Hansen -- there's some pretty fascinating stuff here that confirms the wild hit-or-miss nature of projecting what talented young baseball players might become.

We'll start with arguably the best pick the Red Sox ever made ...

Scout: Larry Monroe

What he said: "Throws 87-88 with fair life. Delivery is fluid but does not use body at all. Should be easily improved and no reason he shouldn't be in low 90s. I'm surprised he doesn't have shoulder problems from standing up and just throwing. Some bend in legs and drive to plate would help velocity, life and location. ... I would take him 2nd round and could be a #1 with right coaching. The kind of pitcher I'd love to work with because simple leg drive would make him very good.''

What we say now: Clemens was the 11th pitcher drafted in '83. Five of those ahead of him never threw a pitch in the majors. (Stan Hilton, 5th; Jackie Davidson, 6th; Rich Stoll, 14th; Wayne Dotson, 15th; Erik Sonberg, 18th.) Kudos to Monroe for recognizing that Clemens could be something special, but man, is that scouting report ever an indictment of the University of Texas coaching staff.

Scout: Jon Niederer (California Angels)

What he said: "Had outstanding offensive freshman year hitting between Craig Biggio and [Marteese] Robinson. Has not seen the kind of pitches to hit since they left and power numbers have fallen off, although he still gets his hits. Feel numbers will come back when he becomes a professional. The bat speed is there. Also has worked hard and improved somewhat defensively. Will never be more than adequate defensively; sooner or later, a full-time DH. Seems like a fine young man, humble and unaffected by all the attention ... positive influence and leader on bench."

What we say now: Hit 230 homers with a .936 OPS in eight seasons with the Red Sox, and his leadership made him an essential figure in Red Sox lore. Enjoyed reading Niederer's spot-on assessment of his character. And to think, they got him seven picks after selecting Greg Blosser.

Scout: Kevin Burrell

What he said: "2nd report, has shown a lot of improvement from beginning of year. Still phys. weak, but has a lot of room to gain weight. Must do so to be a productive everyday ML shortstop in the future. Def. wants to sign, will not have Boris [sic] as an agent. (has been very explisive [sic] of that). Will want final year of school."

What we say now: Hol-eeeee smokes, was he skinny. Also: Not a Scott Boras fan. Point, Nomar.

Scout: Gordon Lakey.

What he said: "Tremendous natural ability. Premium draft. Mormon religion. Can become above-avg. major league pitcher. Desires to play basketball in JC even if he signs."

What we say now: Hurst, a star of the 1986 World Series, is tied with Dennis Eckersley for 20th in Red Sox history with 88 wins. One nitpick with the scouting report: Lakey cites Hurst's "strong facial features.'' It's so offensively absurd that a prospect had to look the part so recently.

<

Scout: Bill Meyer (Chicago White Sox)

What he said: "Has all the tools and instincts to be an ML 1st division starting outfielder. Skills more suited for RF position."

What we say now: Ball is the Red Sox' first No. 7 overall pick since Nixon 20 years ago. I don't think anyone would consider Trot a disappointment -- he had an .845 OPS and 133 homers in eight-plus seasons as a popular member of the Red Sox. But had he not been plagued by injuries virtually from the beginning of his professional career, he might have been a true superstar.

Scout: Russ Bove

What he said: "Built in the Mark Belanger/Gene Michael mold. Plus defensive skills. Makes the routine as well as the spectacular play. ... Plus, plus runner. Not a true base stealer but should steal 20 bases. Good first to third runner. Contact, spray hitter. Some alley pop. Potential Walt Weiss type ML SS..."

What we say now: The Sox hit it big on one skinny, smooth-fielding college shortstop four years earlier, so they went back to the well. Everett never learned to hit, though -- he had a 66 OPS+ in his 11-year career, which was actually worse than Belanger's 68 OPS+. Traded to the Astros for Carl Everett (no relation).

Scout: John Karp

What he said: "Player has the arm and physique to be a major league starter. Player demonstrates aptitude and willingness to learn. Instruction to date has been minimal. Excels as a champion volleyball player and Division 1 basketball prospect. (Heart is with baseball.) Scholarships are baseball/basketball combos. Has signed with Fresno State.''

What we say now: Had a respectable seven-year career in the majors for Cincinnati, Atlanta, and Seattle. Never pitched in bigs for Red Sox, who traded him along with minor leaguer John Curtice to the Reds for Dante Bichette in August 2000.

Scout: Ed Dunn

What he said: "If he makes it, it will be at DH or possibly LF. Very poor 1B. Excellent power to all fields. Hits with a lot of authority. Will have to adjust to the good FB in on him. Drags bat. Only strength allows him to hit it to opposite field. Can run some."

What we say now: The patron saint of Red Sox message boards was a fun flash late in the '87 season, hitting 14 homers in 177 plate appearances. But his flaws were glaring -- he was brutal defensively, couldn't hit lefties, and contrary to this report, could only run in the most rudimentary sense. He never really found the right fit as a righty-mashing DH in his eight-year career. I'll always believe he could have had Cecil Fielder's career with a couple of breaks.

Scout: Gordon Lakey

What he said: "Exciting player to watch, hyper and flaky but always in the game. Not a fluid infielder but makes all the routine plays. Probably will wind up at 3B but would let him play his way off SS. Bat will take some time but is too aggressive to give up on with it."

What we say now: Versatile, hustling, space-shot of a utilityman who had four separate stints with the Red Sox in his nine-year career. Greatest contribution to the franchise? Bringing back Tom Seaver in a trade with the White Sox in June 1986.

Scout: Tom Ferrick

What he said: "Blue chip type. Can be front liner in ML with imp on hitting. Running speed has improved, 4.4 to 1B. Knows how to receive. Shifts easy. On US Olympic team. Wants to sign."

What we say now: Never hit enough to become that front-line catcher -- he went 4 for 50 in 19 games for the 1992 Red Sox -- but he did carve out a respectable decade-long career as a backup. Dies at age 45 in 2008 after falling down stairs outside his apartment.

Scout: Joe Branzell (Texas Rangers)

What he said: "He is going as far as his bat takes him and that could be a long way, all the way to the majors. He may be a tuf sign, unless the selecting club will give his family what they want. Has signed a sch. to Miss. State Univ. Has one of the three tools that is very good (outstanding as a hitter pot.) but his throwing and running speed is short."

What we say now: The attraction came to Fenway, but he didn't stay long, hitting .077 without a home run in 22 games and 45 plate appearances in 1993-94. Did hit 199 homers in a vagabond 15-year minor league career.

Scout: Scott Reid

What he said: "Very poised & aggressive with plus CB & CON. First year; pitched in Elmira & Lynchburg in 1989."

What we say now: Not exactly the most thorough report there, huh? Morton had a ton of hype as he rocketed through the Red Sox system, but he just didn't have the fastball to succeed in the majors. Made 15 starts in '91, struck out 45 and walked 40 in 86.1 innings, allowed a homer in his debut to Cecil Fielder that is currently orbiting a yet-to-be-discovered planet, and never threw another pitch in the big leagues after that season. The Abe Alvarez of his time.

Scout: Steve Vrablik

What he said: "Has great body strength and speed to go with it. Shows good bat speed and power. ... [Needs better] bat discipline and [to] be more selective at the plate. Has to work on a better arm release, muscles the ball in. They said he works on weights during the winter. This player has some good tools going for him but will be a project."

What we say now: The winter weight work -- that was notable then? -- might have helped the 6-foot-4-inch, 220-pound Zupcic look the part. But it never translated to big-league power -- he hit seven homers with a .346 slugging percentage in 886 at-bats. For the miserable '92 Red Sox, he hit three homers in 432 plate appearances.

Scout: Joe Stephenson

What he said: "Parents changed their minds and now say he can sign if college is included and he is drafted high. ... The best RHP I've seen in the last 6 years. Better than Jack McDowell or any college pitcher I have seen this year."

What we say: Suppan did a small part to help the Red Sox win a World Series -- not as a pitcher during his two stints with the team (1995-97, 2003) but with some daffy baserunning as a Cardinal in 2004. Two pitchers chosen ahead of him in '93 had a higher career bWAR -- Chris Carpenter and Billy Wagner. Somehow I doubt his parents regretted letting him sign out of high school -- Suppan made more than $58 million in his career.

Scout: Joe Stephenson

What he said: "Drafted by NY Yanks in 6/70. Wanted $60,000 tax free at that time. In high school pitched and played outfield. At USC has been used only in OF. Built something like Brett with same kind of arm, but has good quick bat and shows signs of becoming an outstanding hitter. Believe OF to be his best spot. Believe him to be one of the best prospects at SC. Will follow."

What we say now: First, I refuse to believe Lynn was drafted by the Red Sox 40 years ago. He barely looks 40 now. Second, the reference to Brett is not to George Brett, but his brother Ken Brett, who was a mega-prospect as both a pitcher and an outfielder, with many teams liking him better as a center fielder. The Red Sox chose him fourth in '66, and he debuted at Fenway the next, glorious season.

Which brings us back to Ball:

This is the highest the Red Sox have taken a LHP since 1966 when they took George Brett's older brother Ken 4th overall

— Jeremy Lundblad (@JLundbladESPN) June 6, 2013

And that, friends, is how it all ties together.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Welcome to Volume 2, Edition 2 of Red Sox power rankings, a wide-ranging excuse to write about the best and worst performers of the previous month as a new one begins. The only rule of the power rankings is that there are no rules to the power rankings. Prospects, Lee Tinsley, media members, Bernie Carbo, front-office personnel - anyone is fair game. It's a measure of the exceptional and the unacceptable, with the middle ground unacknowledged. The top five are ranked; the bottom five are not since our pool of candidates is innumerable. Enough ballpark chatter. Let's get to it ...

TOP FIVE
1. Dustin Pedroia
Second to none
What more can you ask for? Pedroia has put up a .330/.411/.443 slash line so far this season as the No. 3 hitter for the second-best offense in baseball (5.19 runs per game, second only to the Tigers' 5.27). He hit all three of his homers and posted an .894 OPS in May. His defense is as stellar as it has ever been. And he's done it all with a thumb injury suffered on opening day that would have put lesser competitors on the shelf for a good chunk of the spring.

2.Clay Buchholz
True ace
This month's lesson: If you're the top starter on your ballclub and arguably in all of baseball this season, protecting your shoulder, elbow, and any other pitching-related hinges and appendages always must be in the front of your mind, even when you're catching a snooze with your child. Buchholz, tops on this list in April, gave Sox fans a scare when he had to have a start pushed back twice after feeling discomfort in his right AC joint in his shoulder, soreness that resulted, he said, from holding his napping toddler. No worries, though – Buchholz returned 11 days after his previous start to blank the Yankees on two hits through five innings Sunday, capping a month in which he went 2-0 with a 2.31 ERA in five starts.

3. Jarrod Saltalamacchia
Permanent contributor?
There are quite a few hitters we could list who were important in helping the Red Sox end May with a .500 record in the month (15-15) after a slow start in which they lost 9 of 11 games from May 3-14. David Ortiz was ferocious from beginning to end, and Daniel Nava, who has gone from an afterthought to an essential part of the lineup, had an .820 OPS in the month. But the nod here goes to Saltalamacchia, who put up an .825 OPS and drove 10 runs in 19 starts in May while superbackup David Ross was injured.

4. Craig Breslow
Steady southpaw
And why not offer a shout-out to an excellent and unsung performance on the pitching staff as well? Breslow, the veteran lefthander whose second most-similar pitcher all-time statistically is Hideki Okajima, has done excellent work out of the Red Sox bullpen this season, with a 1.29 ERA and .929 WHIP in 13 appearances. His return from an injury that cost him all of April came at the perfect time for the Red Sox, who suffered attrition when Joel Hanrahan was lost for the season and Andrew Bailey was on the disabled list.

5. Xander Bogaerts
It's all happening!
Jose Iglesias has had a heck of a run with the Red Sox so far this season, hitting .431 and playing the usual spectacular defense through two stints in the majors. But if there's a shortstop of the future to really be giddy about, look north toward Portland. Bogaerts, 20 years old and rated the eight-best prospect in the game by Baseball America before the season, is living up to the billing and then some, with 5 homers, a .306 batting average, and an .895 OPS so far for the Sea Dogs. One key sign of progress: he has one walk and 21 strikeouts in 97 Double-A plate appearances last season. This year, he's walked 30 times and whiffed 45 in 231 PAs.

BOTTOM FIVE
Ryan Dempster
Peaks and valleys
The 36-year-old righthander followed up a fine April (3.30 ERA, 43 strikeouts in 30 innings) with a not-so-fine May (5.54 ERA, 1.62 WHIP in six starts). The ups and downs are part of the package – in a dozen starts with the Rangers last year, six or seven were very good and three were brutal. But for the most part, he's been what the Red Sox thought they were getting – a durable innings-eater who will finish with an ERA in the mid-4.00 range.

Shane Victorino
Aches and pains
When he's played, Victorino has been a relatively pleasant surprise, particularly defensively, to those who thought he was in decline after a subpar 2012 season with the Phillies and Dodgers (.667 OPS). But that's the catch – when he's played. Victorino was limited to just 14 starts in May because of injuries, including a back problem that caused him to miss seven straight games from late April into the beginning of the month, as well as a hamstring injury that has kept him out since May 20.

Will Middlebrooks
Sophomore slump
One of the few real disappointments so far for the Red Sox this season, Middlebrooks is hitting just .201 with a .642 OPS in '13 after such a promising debut a year ago. In May, he hit .211 with two homers before winding up on the disabled list May 24 with a strained back.

Jacoby Ellsbury
Safe, then out
While Ellsbury didn't homer in May and put up a substandard .669 OPS, he did have his moments, including a five-steal game against the Phillies. Unfortunately, that's the last time he has played. Ellsbury suffered a groin strain on his club-record-setting fifth steal in the Sox' 9-2 win May 30, and hasn't been in the lineup since, missing a three-game set against the Yankees over the weekend.

Jonny Gomes
Power outage
Gomes has traditionally hammered lefthanded pitching over the course of his career (.504 slugging percentage, 53 homers in 931 at-bats). But he hasn't hit much of anything so far this season, putting up a .175/.323/.301 line against all pitchers. He hit .167 overall in May, and is hitting .158 against lefties, albeit with all three of his homers in 57 at-bats.

***
PREVIOUS 2013 POWER RANKINGS April

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Wavering on Jose Iglesias's potential as a hitter? Not here.

Beginning to waver? Nope.

Beginning to think about wavering? Well ... OK, I guess I'll grant you that one.

After hitting his first home run of the season Sunday night in the Red Sox' 3-0 victory over the Yankees, Iglesias took some remarkable offensive numbers into Monday's day off.

In 57 plate appearances, the 23-year-old shortstop and current third-base temp has posted a .434 batting average and a 1.041 OPS. His start to the season looks like a couple of weeks plucked from the middle of Nomar Garciaparra's brilliant 1999 season, minus a few hundred points of slugging percentage.

He's been awesome, a blast to watch, and you know what else? It's a mirage, a small-sample size torrid streak that defies all logic and common sense.

While the big-league hot streak has survived longer than Iglesias's skeptics would have ever anticipated -- it's lasted through two stints with the Red Sox, sandwiched around an abysmal 133 plate-appearance stretch at Pawtucket -- logic and common sense will not be defied in the end.

Iglesias's batting average on balls in play is .512 and he's hitting line drives in just 14.3 percent of his at-bats, statistical confirmation of what your eyes should tell you -- he's had a enough gorks, ground balls, and dying quails fall in already this season to make Crash Davis jealous.

That simply does not last. You'd think the lessons of putting instant faith in a player who puts up big numbers in a puny sample would have been learned with Pedro Ciriaco last summer, or to a slightly different degree, Jackie Bradley Jr. this spring. I suspect the Venn Diagram of those who thought Ciriaco was the shortstop solution last spring and those who believe we're seeing the real Iglesias now looks like one giant circle.

When the regression arrives and Iglesias's batting average inevitably collapses, when the flares to right field begin finding gloves like they did last September (.118/.200/.191 in 77 plate appearances) and so often through more than 900 PAs in Triple A (.244/.296/.292, including .202/.262/.319 this year), he won't retain any offensive value since he lacks power and rarely works a walk (one this season, five in 140 big-league plate appearances).

I'm somewhat mystified why so many are quick to suggest he's solved his issues at the plate. Why would this sample-size -- a fat batting average wrapped in red flags -- suggest the real Iglesias, or that he's solved anything? His consistently dismal Triple A numbers -- including this year's -- and last season's brutal September shouldn't be so easily dismissed. But I think I get why they are: they don't offer the hope of fulfilled promise that this year's numbers do.

I appreciate the desire for Iglesias to be something special, the next Omar Vizquel rather than the next Rey Ordonez. He is an incredible defensive player, which hasn't been lost in the transition to third base. (He should be playing shortstop now, with Stephen Drew shuffling to third.) But the justifications for why this is real and why he should play are a bit foolish and well past tiresome, and that's without even considering the sense of entitlement that plagued him while he pouted his way south toward the Mendoza line in Pawtucket.

No, he doesn't deserve a chance because, by golly, it took Dustin Pedroia awhile to hit in the majors, too. Pedroia was an offensive force in the minor leagues. And let's stop suggesting Iglesias is one of those players who will hit better in the majors than the minors. I'm still waiting for a recent example that doesn't mention Hanley Ramirez, Don Mattingly, and one or two others who were premier hitting prospects. Vizquel eventually got it, but it took years -- he never had an OPS-plus above 67 until his fourth season.

I'm with you in marveling at his glove. I hope he can hit .250 with a .310 OBP and win a half-dozen Gold Gloves at shortstop. But I look at his numbers -- not just in the big leagues this season, but the entire big picture -- and I can't yet convince myself his bat will justify a daily spot in the lineup.

Iglesias's start has been fun, and it has all but assured that he'll have at least adequate numbers (if he goes 0-for-his-next-47, he'll still be hitting .230). It's almost enough to make me think about wavering. Almost.

But if you want me to be excited about the performance of a young Red Sox shortstop this season, I hope you'll understand when I turn the conversation to 20-year-old Xander Bogaerts and his .882 OPS in Double A. Now there's something to believe in.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Had 'em pegged for fourth place. You?

No, I don't mean the Red Sox. While I'm not warming up for a victory lap just yet, long before we saw the results I appreciated Ben Cherington's reasoned approach of signing a proven if imperfect upper-middle-class of players who at the least would improve the Red Sox' roster depth and character.

I thought they'd be pretty good – a likable wild-card contender – provided that Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz were healthy and rejuvenated. Their performance has exceeded any reasonable explanation, perhaps the essential reason why the first-place Red Sox are more than pretty good.

But the Yankees? The second-place Yankees, who trail the Red Sox by two games in the American League East race as they meet for a three-game series in the Bronx beginning Friday night? I thought they were a fourth-place club in a pinstriped disguise, and the only reason I didn't pick them to finish last is because I believed the Orioles, so fortunate in one-run games a season ago, were headed for a serious regression. Who knew Chris Davis would turn into '27 Babe Ruth?

Instead, here are the Yankees, in the mix as always, though with a different method for success than usual. Their pitching, led by 38-year-old Hiroki Kuroda (6-3, 2.39 ERA), has been exceptional, permitting the second-fewest runs per game (3.83) in the league.

They are not winning by stacking star upon star in the lineup and pummeling opposing pitchers into submission. The Yankees rank 11th in the AL in runs per game (4.11), ahead of only Kansas City, Houston, Seattle and the Chicago White Sox, They have scored 10 runs in their last five games, and MVP candidate Robinson Cano is surrounded by a cast that seems like it could be the preliminary roster for the 2014 Long Island Ducks: Vernon Wells, Travis Hafner, Red Sox refugee Lyle Overbay, Jayson Nix, Chris Stewart, and various other discards and mediocrities.

While Yankees general manager Brian Cashman has again shown a deft touch in finding fallen stars who might thrive in a particular role -- Wells and Hafner are this year's Andruw Jones and Eric Chavez -- relying on such players for an extended stretch is not a sustainable model for success. Wells has a .610 OPS in May. Hafner is pre-scheduling his next MRI, just in case.

Yet they really have no choice. Derek Jeter and Alex Rodriguez have not played because of injury, Mark Teixeira will be active tonight for the first time this season, and Kevin Youkilis and Curtis Granderson have 103 plate appearances between them.

As it is, the Yankees are probably asking too much of the returning Teixeira and Youkilis. You get the sense their injured guys who are supposed to give them a boost will come back ... and get injured again. It already happened, in a fluky way, to Granderson.

Still, kudos to them for McGyvering the whole thing together through the first one-third of the season. While the True Yankees have for the most part become a lineup of Who Yankees, their surprising success in the wake of all that they have endured means that this weekend's series has a little extra juice to it.

It's the first time the Red Sox and Yankees have met since the opening series of the season, and it's the first time they've met when it's mattered to both teams since ... well, it's been a little while, probably since the four-game set early last July when the Red Sox were still hovering around .500 and hadn't hit the iceberg yet.

From a Red Sox perspective, the highlight of their showdowns with the Yankees last year was watching Pedro Ciriaco get a bunch of hits en route to becoming our favorite journeyman-on-a-hot-streak mirage since Dwyane Hosey or Rudy Pemberton. Those are the things you cling to when your rival finishes 26 games and four spots ahead of you in the standings.

It's nice that the games matter again. I mean, of course they always matter in some way in this rivalry, even back in the days when both teams were fodder for the real contenders and the most heated debate was whether Phil Plantier or Kevin Maas would get to 400 career homers first.

I'll never be one to howl that the Red Sox lost a part of their identity in October 2004. But I do miss the white-hot intensity of the Yankees-Red Sox rivalry of a decade of a decade ago, or even 15 years ago when the vibe was Pedro, Nomar, and 23 role players against the world.

That mutual hatred – and that is the right word – is absent to some degree, at least until the rosters are both extraordinary and the stakes are at their steepest.

Right now, the Red Sox are a legitimately good team, and the Yankees have pieced it all together improbably to play like one so far. On June 1, that's a fine place to be.

For those who didn't believe in the Red Sox from the beginning, here's to raised expectations, and the new faith that they are the sole team in this rivalry that will continue to exceed them.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I believe it was my colleague Kevin Paul Dupont -- I like to think of him as the Adam Oates to my Clayton Beddoes during our Globe 10.0 appearances -- who was the first to note over the weekend that the final five teams remaining in the Stanley Cup playoff were the last five Stanley Cup winners.

With the Chicago Blackhawks' predictably epic Game 7 overtime victory Wednesday night over the Red Wings, there are now four teams remaining. And those four teams -- the Blackhawks, Penguins, defending champion Kings, and your champion-once-removed Boston Bruins -- have accounted for the last four Cups.

The NHL postseason is always one of the greatest extended thrill rides sports has to offer. But beyond the noticeable absence of a Canadian entry, it's hard to imagine it being any better than it is right now, with these four sublime teams remaining.

I'm not sure, in this lockout-altered season, if the league and its franchise owners deserve such good fortune, such compelling final chapters to a season that began in shame.

But the fans sure do. And it's even a little more fun if you look at the final foursome on a micro level. I loved this:

According to the NHL's morning release, 56 players on the remaining 4 teams have won a Stanley Cup - LA 19, BOS 18, PIT 11, CHI 8.

— Craig Custance (@CraigCustance) May 30, 2013

It really is a tournament of champions at this point (though that Blackhawks number is surprisingly low -- they really did some major roster remodeling beyond Patrick Kane, Jonathan Toews and their other stars).

If we're able to put aside parochialism, wouldn't we have to admit that if the four finalists were seeded on their probability of winning the Cup, the Bruins would probably be ... fourth?

It's already been a remarkable run, with the Game 7 escape from the grave against the Leafs, then the humbling of the Rangers in five games in the second round. But the road to the Cup is far more challenging that it was two years ago -- every team remaining this postseason, plus the Red Wings, is arguably superior to the Canucks team that took the Bruins to seven games in '11.

(In the spirit of gaining any advantage by any means, maybe the Bruins could hire the deposed John Tortorella as an assistant coach in charge of staring hate lasers at Sidney Crosby until he whines to the referee about it?)

So let's forget the Western Conference for now. The task at hand is daunting enough. The Bruins are going to have to be brilliant to beat the loaded Penguins, who somehow took Milan Lucic's comparison to the Miami Heat as an offense, when it's a complimentary truth. They loaded up and are built to win now, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's what they should do with Crosby and Evgeni Malkin, two of the world's most dynamic players, healthy and at their peak, and so much complementary skill and support up and down the roster.

But this is not to suggest the Bruins are running into a buzzsaw like the 1988 or '90 Edmonton Oilers, or even the '91 Penguins of Jaromir Jagr's mulleted youth. With a goaltending advantage in Tuukka Rask, four quality lines, a do-it-all star in Patrice Bergeron, and a multi-skilled corps of defensemen, they are not a comfortable matchup for the Penguins.

The Bruins can do this. More important, they know they can do this. Such a mindset, that universal confidence in yourself and your teammates, it's more important than any other motive, though revenge against Jarome Iginla for choosing Pittsburgh over Boston sure would be a sweet dessert.

But that's a daydream for now. Reality reignites on Saturday, with eight wins down for the Bruins, and eight to go. Every one of those necessary eight will have to be earned, one shift at a time, one save at a time, with each small in-game win leading to a larger one, the sacrifices along the way ranging from personal glory to perhaps an incisor or two.

Even with a consistent offering of their best effort, the Bruins could still fall short of the goal. Given the competition, there would be no shame in that. The Bruins, with those 18 champions on their roster, know what it takes this time of year, but so does every other opponent they will face off against.

But who knows -- perhaps the enhanced degree of difficulty this time around will make it all the more sweeter should they emerge as the champion among champions. I cannot wait for the puck to drop, so we can finally get back to discovering what they are truly capable of achieving.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

In a column last week, I noted, with the usual digital cardboard evidence, that plodding White Sox first baseman Paul Konerko was actually drafted by the Dodgers as a catcher.

As one correspondent noted, perhaps it was done with the purpose of making Mike Piazza look good defensively by comparison.

The general I-had-no-idea reaction to Catcher Konerko was fun and surprising, which got me thinking about other prominent players who began their careers at a position different from the one they became known for playing.

The list is far from complete, in part because I mostly tried to keep it to ones where I could find -- again -- that cardboard evidence of the player in that unfamiliar defensive spot. The one exception I made was for Jorge Posada, probably just because it gave me an excuse to mention Dave Roberts.

Here's the list I had a blast coming up with. Share some others in the comments, or drop me a note on Twitter ...

1. Chipper Jones, shortstop

It's cockamamie theory, sure, one as ridiculous as scouts judging a ballplayer by the "good face." Still, I'll always suspect that had he gone by his birth name, he wouldn't have been close to the same player. Chipper Jones? Hall of Fame lock and dude who played 49 of his 2,405 big-league games at shorstop. Larry Wayne Jones? Master of microwaving a bloomin' onion just so as the fourth-best fry cook at the 16th-best Chilli's in Jacksonville, Florida.

2. Paul Molitor, shortstop

The third choice in the 1977 draft out of the University of Minnesota, it took Molitor and his quick, flawless righthanded swing all of 64 minor-league games to reach the majors for good in '78. But the presence of another future Hall of Famer -- a kid named Yount, who had made it himself at 18 and was far superior with the glove -- necessitated a move to another position. Nice problem to have, huh? Molitor bounced from second base to third base to the outfield and eventually to DH, playing just 57 games at shortstop in his stellar 21-season career.

3. Gary Sheffield, shortstop

Yount eventually did change positions, famously winning a second American League Most Valuable Player award as a center fielder (1990) after claiming his first eight years earlier at shortstop. Yount made the move to center because of a shoulder injury before the 1985 season, which conveniently made way for a promising young Brewers shortstop. Sheffield? Nope. He came up in '88. Where have you gone, Ernie Riles?

4. Craig Biggio, catcher

Can't imagine there are many players in history who played hundreds of games at three very different and distinct positions, but Biggio is one. He caught 428 big league games (including his final game in 2007, 16 years after he last donned the mask), played the outfield in 363 others (255 in center field), but spent the majority of his career at second base (1,989 games). Now that's a ballplayer who has seen the game from pretty much every angle.

5. Jorge Posada, second baseman

Just think -- had he not converted to catcher full-time in 1992, he might have been the Yankee failing to tag out Dave Roberts rather than failing to throw him out.

6. Dale Murphy, catcher

Actually, his career path is one that's pretty similar to Biggio's -- at least the catcher-to-center-field part. Murphy, a two-time National League Most Valuable Player and one of the nicest superstars you will ever meet, developed that mental block about throwing the ball that has derailed or stunted quite a few promising careers (Dave Engle, Mackey Sasser, even Jarrod Saltalamacchia for a time). He moved to first base briefly before Bobby Cox made him a center fielder in 1980. Decent decision, skip -- Murphy won five straight Gold Gloves from 1982-86.

7. Carlos Delgado, catcher

This card confirms that Carlos Delgado was a catcher. His baseball-reference page confirms that Carlos Delgado was a catcher. Heck, I saw Carlos Delgado as a catcher when he got off to a torrid start as a rookie with the Blue Jays in 1994. And yet I still cannot believe that Carlos Delgado, the epitome of a power-hitting first baseman, was a catcher. Just one of those things that doesn't compute.

8. Raul Ibanez, catcher

I'll be honest. I had no idea he was once a catcher until I heard it recently on an ESPN baseball podcast. Heck, I had no idea he was ever young. He's one of those guys who seems like he was 35 at birth.

Are we sure this is the same Miguel Cabrera?

9. Miguel Cabrera, shortstop

One more time: Miguel Cabrera, shortstop. That was a real thing. I suppose it's a clue to what a tremendous athlete he is at his core, that he's more than a phenomenal hitter. But can you imagine him playing shortstop today, having added a few layers to that core over the years? Actually, now that you mention it, his range probably wouldn't be a whole lot worse than Jhonny Peralta's.

Refugees of the not-so-hot corner

10. Jason Giambi, third baseman

You think watching him play third base would be scary? Imagine being a pitcher facing him while he's wielding an aluminum bat -- heck, even before he got huge by picking things up and putting them down.

11. Jeff Bagwell, third baseman

In 205 games and 710 at-bats as a Red Sox minor leaguer, Bagwell hit a total of six home runs. During the 2000 season with the Astros, Bagwell hit more than six home runs in four separate months. And in the other two months, he hit five homers in each.

12. Mark Teixeira, third baseman

Hey, remember when Hank Blalock was a future superstar? I do, vaguely -- I seem to recall Peter Gammons comparing him to George Brett. Didn't quite happen, but Blalock was the major reason Teixeira converted to first base, where he's done OK for himself.

13. Mark McGwire, third baseman

If Big Mac as a third baseman makes for a strange visual, just imagine what he looked like on the mound. As a collegian at Southern Cal, where his teammates included Randy Johnson, he went 7-5 with a sub-3.00 ERA over the 1982-83 seasons.

14. Jim Thome, third baseman

Thome actually played quite a bit of third base in the big leagues -- 491 games from 1991-96, and one game at age 40. Still, it's hard to picture Thome, the quintessential lumbering slugger, ever doing much more than slugging and lumbering. Here he is in Double A, perfecting the velcro-ball-in-the-glove trick that duped enough Eastern League umpires along the way into believing he'd actually fielded the real ball cleanly.

15. Tim Wakefield, third baseman

Yep, that is correct -- third base. Ol' Wake played 17 games at the hot corner across two levels of Single A ball in 1989. For him, it was more like the lukewarm corner. His .818 fielding percentage suggests he wasn't exactly '78 Butch Hobson, let alone vintage Brooks Robinson. Based on what we know now, I suspect that's because he was working on his knuckleball on the long throw from third to first.

He'd be in Cooperstown had he stayed at 2B

16. Tim Raines, second baseman

Then again, he was a pretty awful second baseman. And if there's justice, he's going to the Hall of Fame anyway.

Playing nine innings while enjoying John Lackey's subtle climb to fan-favorite status ...

1. The sentiment that the Red Sox should have done everything they could to keep Jonathan Papelbon has grown stronger in the two years he's been gone. While the Sox have struggled to find consistency and health at closer, he's continued to rule the ninth inning for the Phillies just as he did here for six years. As he's done so, the evidence mounts that he is the rare closer who can maintain his excellence and consistency for the better part of a decade, and thus worthy of a lucrative long-term deal. I still can't reconcile the idea of giving a closer $50 million over four years, but I might believe that the Red Sox lament losing him more than the Phillies will lament paying him.

2. Dustin Pedroia is third in the American League in baseball-reference's version of WAR, is hitting .333 with an .873 OPS (his career best is .869 in his 2008 MVP season), has put up a 330/.405/.495 slash-line so far in May, and seems to make at least one brilliant defensive play per game. The reminders of how fortunate we are to watch this guy on a daily basis shouldn't be necessary, but man, he sure has been delivering a lot of them lately anyway.

3. If the Red Sox do end up having a special season, Jacoby Ellsbury's winning hit Saturday will be one of those clues along the way that we like to reminisce about anecdotally. But to me, the best indication I got all weekend that things are going well for the Red Sox is that Clay Buchholz's sore collarbone is nothing to be particularly concerned about. It just feels like that was the kind of thing that would have cost him 4-6 weeks last year, just because, you know, that's how last year went.

4. While staring with wonderment and awe at Jose Iglesias's .519 batting average on balls in play this season, for some reason it dawned on me that there are at least a couple of presumed good-field, no-hit shortstops who are getting it done with the bat so far this season. Arizona's Didi Gregorius was a lock for the All-Name Team, but the rookie is making a case for the All-Star team with a .926 OPS in 124 plate appearances. The Giants' Brandon Crawford has an .812 OPS and 25 RBIs. And the Brewers' Jean Segura is on the short list of MVP candidates in the NL, with eight homers and a .942 OPS.

5. If not for the relatively legible signature, I doubt I'd be able to tell you who this 1975 Dodger is even if you told me he's a current big league manager and gave me 25 guesses. Maybe even 28.

6. I wouldn't call it a full-fledged career revival quite yet, but old friend Jason Bay has been contributing to the Mariners this season (.787 OPS, 5 homers in 121 plate appearances). And he's doing it from an unusual spot in the lineup – he's been the Mariners' leadoff hitter in four of the past five games.

7. Don't worry about Ryan Dempster. Just accept that this is what he is – a mid-rotation starter who pitches a lot of league-averageish innings, can pile up the strikeouts on his best days, battles his control from time to time, and ultimately has peaks and valleys that are more than tolerable in the long run.

8. In 25 games this month, Mike Trout has 8 homers, 26 runs scored, 8 steals, an 1.162 OPS, and a .354/.432/.729. In a related note, those who confidently predicted regression in his sophomore season have been awfully hard to find lately. And in another related note, remember how close the Angels came to acquiring Miguel Cabrera in 2007?

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

Because sometimes, it really is random.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Before the Remy Report, there were the Remy reports.

No, this isn't a reference to RemDawg's now-infamous, beyond-hilarious Playgirl supermodel days. If you somehow don't already know what I'm talking about, a simple search on Baseball Prospectus will clue you in, and OBF also has it here. (It probably is SFW, depending upon how your boss feels about Steve Stone.)

This is about another long-lost discovery from Remy's playing days, an exhibit rather than an exhibition. Unless the 1970s Angels had a particularly unusual uniform of which I'm unaware -- entirely possible given that era -- Remy most definitely is not wearing short-jorts in any of this.

The Baseball Hall of Fame, as a companion to a new exhibit in Cooperstown honoring scouts, recently launched a website, titled Diamond Mines, that serves as a searchable database for what seems to be thousands of individual scouting reports of major league players either during their careers or as unknown amateurs.

It's not conventionally perfect. The interface may well have been lifted from a 1997 Angel Fire site. The search function has roughly a .500 winning percentage in finding what you're looking for on the first try. The list of players is incomplete. (I was bummed that there was no Lyman Bostock report. Or Butch Hobson.)

But if blunt and previously unrevealed insight and opinions from those who were trusted by big league teams to judge players is something that appeals to you, well, it damn sure is perfect.

I've been lost there more times than I can count in recent weeks, looking up all the former Maine Guides and favorite obscurities I can jostle from the back of my mind, as well as the Red Sox-related suspects and superstars you'd expect: Manny Ramirez, Nomar Garciaparra, Pedro Martinez, Jason Varitek ("A real animal"), Roger Clemens, and Ellis Burks ("Shows few star qualities").

Just when you think you're done, another player pops to mind, and there goes another 20 minutes.

One discovery that I found particularly fascinating was a series of five scouting reports on Remy after the 1977 season. He was 24 years old, coming off his third full season as the California Angels's starting second baseman, one in which he hit .252 with 41 stolen bases and an OPS of .663. In retrospect, that's the season of a player who should have had to fight to earn a job the next year, but it was a different time, one in which the perception of grit got your name on the lineup card, and he was entrenched as the starter, presumably secure in his position.

Except those five unearthed scouting reports, which appear to be the product of the Angels' self-scouting postmortem on the '77 season, suggest otherwise. And they ultimately serve as key forensic information on why Remy was traded to the Red Sox that December for pitcher Don Aase.

It's a deal that worked out OK for the Angels, fairly well for the Red Sox, and very well for Remy, who had significant statistical flaws (in seven seasons in Boston, he had a .334 slugging percentage and a .334 on-base percentage) but parlayed his popularity as a player into even greater popularity as a broadcaster.

Coming from California to Boston altered the course of his life, so in a sense it was a blessing that the Angels doubted him. And they did -- here's what manager Dave Garcia, coaches Bob Clear, Jimmie Reese and Marv Grissom, and backup catcher-turned-scout Andy Etchebarren offered in candid assessment of Remy way back when:

Dave Garcia (report here) -- Disappointed in Jerry's fielding mostly -- at times he showed fear of the ball and let too many balls play him. Complained that our infield dirt was rough. That may be true, but it shouldn't bother a major league fielder. Will have to make double play better. Offensively, has to get many more walks. Robby will work with him this spring. When he gets 100 walks he'll steal 60 bases + score 100 runs.

I tried, and I could not figure out who Robby The Walk Guru was. But Remy never approached 100 walks -- his career high actually was 59 in '77. So maybe that's why Robby remained anonymous.

[Update: So, yeah, Robby was pretty much the opposite of anonymous -- it's Frank Robinson, who accomplished a thing or two en route to a first-ballot Hall of Fame career. That's who I initially assumed it was, but a cursory search couldn't provide evidence that he was an Angels coach that year. Turns out he was, briefly -- he joined Garcia's staff after he was fired by the Indians, where he had become baseball's first African-American manager two years before. Oh, OK ... that Robby. Yes, I'm a dope.]

Bob Clear (report here) -- He is 3rd best 2nd baseman we have. Can't field good enough to put us on top. Has fear on D.P. and ground balls. Range is not good. He is not as good as he was. Can steal and runs good. Good hustler. Should be a better hitter. Move him so Grich can play second. Would have a better club. Would help our pitching.

In theory, Clear was right on, and it appears his advice was heeded. Grich, one of the most underrated players of his time, joined the Angels as a free agent before the 1977 season. He won three Gold Gloves as a second baseman with the Orioles, but moved to short with the Angels in part because of Remy's presence but also because young Mike Miley had been killed in a car accident and underwhelming Orlando Ramirez was the main holdover. But when Remy was dealt to the Red Sox, Grich returned to his natural position before the '78 season. He went on to play 10 seasons in total for the Angels, hitting 154 homers with a 124 adjusted OPS. Aase was average, going 39-39 with a 99 ERA+ in six seasons with the Angels. The Angels, who apparently didn't self-scout Dickie Thon quite so well, never did quite find a shortstop until trading for Remy's Red Sox double-play partner Rick Burleson before the 1981 season. I do wonder, though, who Clear thought was a better second baseman than Remy besides Grich. Rance Mulliniks? Dave Chalk? Mario Guerrero?

Jimmie Reese (report here) -- It may surprise you when I say that Jerry, in my estimation, has slowed up a step, particularly in the field, where ordinary ground balls are skipping by him. Also a bit timid on double plays. Could bring a valuable player if any club needs a second baseman. He is certainly marketable.''

Reese was regarded as one of baseball's great gentlemen during his wholly distinctive 77-year career in professional baseball. He roomed with Babe Ruth -- or his suitcase, as the famous joke goes -- during the early '30s with the Yankees. (No, Reese never did play with Mariano Rivera.) Decades later, he made such an impression on Nolan Ryan during his time with the Angels that the pitcher named a son after him. I suggest that's a rather gentlemanly way of saying get Remy out of here.

Andy Etchebarren (report here) -- He needs to learn not to hit so many fly balls, bunt more, and learn not to [be] afraid of ground balls. He plays to [sic] many balls to the side.

Given that Etchebarren was actually Remy's teammate in '77, the solicitation of his opinion is ... well, it's eyebrow-raising, that's what it is.

Marv Grissom (report here) Like everything about him.

Just a thought here, but perhaps Mr. Grissom wasn't the most thorough scout? At least Remy had someone fully in his corner.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Playing nine innings while savoring the embarrassed silence from those who detracted Dustin Pedroia during last season's mess ...

1. Since the beginning of the 2012 season, which spans 118 games and 531 plate appearances, Jacoby Ellsbury has hit five home runs. Five. That's three fewer homers than he hit in September 2011, when his Most Valuable Player-caliber performance down the stretch (1.067 OPS in the final month) was buried beneath his teammates' avalanche of beer cans and chicken bones during the infamous collapse. His lack of power since may seem mystifying, and perhaps his emergence as a slugger that season (32 homers, 23 more than he has hit in any other season) is easily dismissed as a fluke. I'm probably among the minority in believing that he will hit for significant power before the season is through, and that his return to full strength from the traumatic injury pictured above still isn't complete. But if he doesn't come around, it'll be fascinating to see how it affects his market value. It wouldn't shock me at all if he signed an Adrian Beltre-style one-year deal here or elsewhere to rebuild his value before diving back into free agency. But such a consideration is a long way down the road.

2. For those of us who have spent the first couple months of the season debating the current and potential merits of Jose Iglesias, a compromise may be near. According to the Providence Journal's excellent baseball writer Brian MacPherson, Iglesias took groundballs at third base Monday, and first took grounders at second base a couple of weeks ago. Nothing is apparently imminent, but given that Pedro Ciriaco is proving to be a mirage, bringing Iglesias back to the big leagues in a utility role might make some sense.

3. Daniel Nava just keeps raking. In 61 May plate appearances, he's at .286/.377/.469, with a couple of homers and 11 runs batted in. It's easy to forget – or at least it was easy for me to forget – that he was actually just as productive last May as well, putting up a .277/.424/.477 slash line with two homers and 15 RBIs in 85 plate appearances. He had an excellent June as well (.892) before falling off in part due to a hand injury. I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it: I was wrong about Nava. He's a legitimate quality major-league hitter. Kudos to the Red Sox for recognizing it.

4. This is Josh Hamilton since the All-Star break last year: 113 games, 482 plate appearances, 434 at-bats, 107 hits, .247 batting average, 21 homers, 65 RBIs, 36 walks, 134 strikeouts. In that span, he's basically produced the equivalent of Pete Incaviglia's 1988 season. Thank goodness the Red Sox learned from their mistakes.

5. This came up in my chat last Friday, and I can't recall if I answered the question or not, but the suggestion annoyed me. No, Yu Darvish doesn't remind me of Daisuke Matsuzaka whatsoever. I suppose the Rangers' ace is what Matsuzaka was supposed to be, but they don't have much in common beyond the ability to throw a baseball righthanded and the same country of origin. Darvish, with his ridiculous repertoire, is a joy to watch. Matsuzaka was exasperating, and that includes even during his scattered outstanding performances, because you were inevitably left wondering why he couldn't perform that way (and pitch aggressively) all the time.

6. Allow me to submit this as evidence that Rubby De La Rosa is going to be a significant contributor in some capacity for the Red Sox before the summer is through: In his last five appearances with the PawSox, he has pitched 18 innings. in those 18 innings, he has allowed 9 hits, 8 walks, and 1 unearned run while striking out 22. While the walks suggest the command isn't quite there yet, he's been untouchable when he throws strikes. And remember, he's no novice – this is a kid who struck out 60 in 60.2 innings for the Dodgers two years ago.

7. Miguel Cabrera's top five career comps through age 29 according to baseball-reference.com: Frank Robinson, Hank Aaron, Ken Griffey Jr., Albert Pujols, and Mel Ott. Yeah, decent company. Cabrera turned 30 a month ago. To me, he's a Hall of Fame lock if he retires before his 31st birthday.

8. Cabrera, whom I hope wins his second consecutive Triple Crown just because it would be an awesome feat, has received MVP votes every season of his career -- including 2003, when he played 87 games and hit .268 with 12 homers, 62 RBIs, and a .793 OPS for the World Champion 2003 Marlins. He finished 27th in the balloting that year, and fifth in the rookie of the year race, behind teammate Dontrelle Willis, No. 3 hitter deluxe Scott Podsednik, Brandon Webb, and Marlon Byrd.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

That's right. Catcher. Even more unfathomable than Jim Thome, third baseman. But not quite as unfathomable as Miguel Cabrera, shortstop.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

At the end of April, the Red Sox were in first place at 18-8, which projects to a 112-win pace over a full 162-game season.

Thirteen days into May, they're 4-8 in the month with a minus-18 run differential in those dozen games, and their win projection is now down to 94.

This isn't just a market correction for the Red Sox, who have lost eight of 10 games and their last three series. It's on the verge of an overcorrection.

Based on the peaks and valleys we've witnessed through roughly a quarter of the season, a win total in the low 90s seems about right – perhaps even conservative if the recent roster attrition slows down.

As a nine-game road trip dawns following Monday's much-needed day off, now is the time to get into the flow of the season, to find that happy medium between the juggernaut of April and the accidental slouches of May.

While they might not be able to remedy this instantly – they face unbeaten Matt Moore in Tuesday's opener of a three-game set with the Rays – they will remedy it, and soon.

This is a good, well-rounded team, one that at the very least, presuming reasonable roster-wide health, will be playing meaningful games in late September and probably into October.

No worries, then? Well, some. The bullpen attrition is the most troubling long-term issue. Joel Hanrahan was brutal, injured, brutal again, and then lost for the season. His is a difficult loss to overcome based on what he could have been. His velocity and movement were there, but the control and command were absent. It's not that he couldn't handle this market. It's that his elbow could no longer handle the demands of the job.

Now they're dependent on Andrew Bailey, no stranger to the disabled list in recent years, to stay healthy and pitch as well as he was before his right biceps began bothering him. The retroactive yelps for Jonathan Papelbon are growing louder, and perhaps he is the rare closer who is worth the big payday because of his consistency, but give Bailey (1.46 ERA, .81 WHIP) a chance to prove he can stay healthy.

In the meantime, if you wish, feel free to daydream about trading for Papelbon at the July 31 deadline. The Phillies are going nowhere, and he's a luxury.

The immediate saving grace for this team, believe it or not, could be its starting pitching. Jon Lester did his job as the stopper in the opener of the Jays series, throwing an efficient, almost effortless one-hitter.

Clay Buchholz didn't win the second game, but it's an encouraging sign that he was masterful against the team whose announcers started this whole is-he-doctoring-the-ball? sideshow. His stuff is exceptional, and his mental toughness has come a long way from the 2009 postseason, when the Red Sox were worried about how he'd handle the pressure of starting against the Angels. I can't wait to see what the next couple of seasons have in store now that he's an ace in full.

John Lackey (2.82 ERA) and Ryan Dempster (3.75 ERA) are capable of providing exactly what the Red Sox need from their 3-4 starters – a legitimate chance every time out. Yes, they're just a combined 3-7, but that's not a reflection on them but on an offense that hasn't picked them up enough – and hasn't picked anyone up lately.

The Red Sox are actually fifth in the American League in runs (4.76 per game), four spots ahead of the American League East-leading Yankees (4.36), who have thrived despite losing about 150 homers and from a year ago to injury and free-agency. (They've succeeded despite burned-out midge-magnet Joba Chamberlain apparently yelling "YOU'RE NOT THE BOSS OF ME!" to anyone who dares shush his wisdom, including that graceful robot, Mariano Rivera.)

During the Jays series, though, it felt like the Red Sox hadn't scored 4.76 runs total all season. They were 3 for 37 with runners in scoring position against Toronto, including 0 for 8 in Sunday's loss. They left more players stranded on base than there were Bruins stranded overnight in Toronto.

Such team-wide ineffectiveness is a fluke more than anything else, but that doesn't make it any less exasperating. No one is about to suggest that we should put on the hindsight glasses and resume begging for Josh Hamilton, especially since he's been a fascinating mess for the Angels following a .259 batting average in the second half last year in Texas. But it would be swell if Jacoby Ellsbury's much-anticipated contract drive started any day now. He has a .676 OPS and has combined with Dustin Pedroia for exactly two home runs this season. Nothing would right this offense more than those two getting hot at the same time.

Then there is David Ortiz, who has lost, let's see, 93 points off his batting average since Dan Shaughnessy's controversial column asking him about performance-enhancing drugs ran Thursday. At the very least, his recent performance (or lack of performance) lends credence to the suggestion that a larger sample-size was probably required before broaching the PED topic based on his eye-popping numbers after a few dozen at-bats.

Like the Red Sox, he's not as great as he looked early, and he's not as miserable as he looked the past few days.

Their reasonable expectation of performance is somewhere in between.

And despite recent indications to the contrary, the confident bet here is that their true selves were revealed more by their April success that their so-far sluggish May.

It'll get better soon. They'll get better soon. The bad has followed the good. Now it's time to flip the script again.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Playing nine innings while hoping Jack Morris and Dirk Hayhurst are overwhelmed by guilt when Clay Buchholz inevitably gets a sunburn ...

1. Despite the mildly amusing, hopefully harmless bullfrog-'n'- resin controversy, I have complete faith that Buchholz, should he remain healthy, will perform as a legitimate ace for the Red Sox all season.

The talent and repertoire has always been there. He's in his prime now, has a manager who knows him and believes in him, and by all accounts he's matured into a leader by actions if not words.

(This is semi-related, but one Red Sox employee recently told me that no player has spent more time chatting with fans and signing autographs this season, and this is a good team for that sort of stuff. Buchholz might have had maturity issues early in his career, but those days are gone. He's a good guy who gets it.)

The one thing I still wonder about is whether he has the vengeful mean-streak on the mound that seems common among truly great pitchers, with Pedro Martinez and Roger Clemens exhibits 1A and 1B around here.

With Toronto coming to town and Jack Morris peering down from his perch above, there's no better time for Buchholz to go out there with an attitude that he has something to prove -- even if he really doesn't.

2. So here the Red Sox stand, suddenly mired in their first slump of the season, with six losses in their past seven games, including three in a four-game set to the mediocre Twins. Worried? Not particularly. They've gone from 18-7 to 21-14, but hey, a .720 winning percentage isn't sustainable, and .600 is pretty damn good. I don't expect the regression to the mean to go on much longer, particularly with Jon Lester, Buchholz and Ryan Dempster lined up the next three days against the Jays. Sure, the attrition in the bullpen is a concern, but I'm a believer in Junichi Tazawa (learn the name, ESPN Fantasy Focus guys) and Koji Uehara no matter the role. And the starting pitching seems deep enough in the first four spots that middle-innings depth may not be as essential as it was entering the season. Ultimately, this is a rough spot, not an indication of who they really are.

3. Allen Webster's problems in his start Wednesday were myriad, but it is curious that he threw just a handful of sinkers, by all accounts his best pitch. I do wonder whether it might have gone differently had David Ross been behind the plate rather than Jarrod Saltalamacchia. After all, it was Ross who worked in tandem with him during his six-inning, two-earned-run debut April 21 against the Royals.

4. Man, has Ross had an oddly distinctive career. He's a fine defensive catcher, throws well, is a master at stealing a strike call, pitchers love him, has a .771 career OPS without hardly any platoon split (.774 OPS vs. RHP, .766 against LHP), averages a home run roughly every 25 plate appearances... and yet he's played for six franchises and has had over 200 plate appearances just twice in his dozen seasons. Maybe he's perfectly cast in the role he's always had. But he sure seems to have the set of tools required to be a quality starter.

5. After a slow start, top prospect Xander Bogaerts is at .298/.365/.471 at Portland, with 10 extra-base hits (4 doubles, 4 triples, 2 homers) in 116 plate appearances. Down at High-A Salem, Deven Marrero, last year's first rounder, has an .851 OPS in his first 60 plate appearances, a small but encouraging sample. If Jose Iglesias is worried about his place in the shortstop hierarchy, he shouldn't just be looking ahead to Boston, but behind him.

6. Will Middlebrooks is obviously struggling mightily -- so mightily that his .608 OPS in 131 plate appearances so far is exactly .002 higher than hapless Marlon Byrd's in 106 PAs last year. Meanwhile, 2012 flash Pedro Ciriaco is looking like a 26th man now that his defensive liabilities have been exposed. If this keeps up, I'm not sure what the Red Sox should do at third base. But I do like my Globe colleague Geoff Edgers's suggestion:

@sean_mcadam We need Butch Hobson back.

— Geoff Edgers (@geoffedgers) May 10, 2013

Been saying that since '81 around here.

7. It stinks that it's come to this. And I'm far from assuming guilt -- to me, it's an somewhat unlikely torrid streak by an accomplished hitter in a small sample size. But if the thought Dan Shaughnessy turned into a column didn't at least cross your mind about David Ortiz -- who is 37, missed essentially the last half of last season, has been linked to performance-enhancing drugs in the past, and was slugging .815 after his first 59 plate-appearances -- then at the least I have to presume you're not a believer in healthy skepticism.

8. Stephen Drew has complained about more strike calls in the past two weeks (during which he's hitting .375/.422/.600, by the way, and c'mon, you knew I'd shoehorn that in) Don't judge a book by his brother, or however the saying goes.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

I'll write more about some unearthed discoveries in the extraordinary Diamond Mines scouting report database soon. The database, an offshoot of a new Baseball Hall of Fame exhibit on scouting, is full of fascinating and often prescient information. But here's just one that made me chuckle. It's a report filed by Royals scout Tom Ferrick in 1976 on a Tampa prep ballplayer named Wade Anthony Boggs. The report is fairly encouraging, but here's the part that got me, right there under "weaknesses":

Bat slow and even falls back at plate against RHP ... Rigid bat mechanics. Needs a lot of help with bat.

So what you're saying then is that he's not going to hit .363 in the big leagues anytime soon? Gotcha, Tom.

Boggs's work ethic and self-confidence are legendary, and considering he wasn't regarded as much of a prospect even after advancing to Pawtucket, this scouting report is further confirmation of the time and effort he put in to become one of baseball's great hitters.

Of course, it could also be an indication that Royals scouts had an impossible standard for left-handed hitting third baseman in the '70s since the guy on their ballclub was pretty good. George somebody or other.

Actually, it appears Ferrick wasn't exactly blown away by George Brett, either ...

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

It hardly fits the conventional definition of "stopper,'' but such a designation this morning probably belongs not to Red Sox ace Clay Buchholz, but to shortstop Stephen Drew.

Or perhaps I just see it that way because I am on the record, multiple times to the point of annoyance I am sure, as celebrating the entire Drew family catalog, and it's finally becoming justified.

In the Red Sox' 6-5, 11-inning victory over the Twins Monday night – a win that snapped a mildly concerning three-game losing streak – Drew had four hits, including a tying home run in the seventh and a two-out game-winning RBI double in the 11th.

He's a good player, and Monday night he was at his best when they needed it.

Buchholz? He was not at his best – that's become a rather high standard – though he was hardly dismal. He needed 36 pitches to escape the first inning, assisted by the generous impatience of Twins rookies Oswaldo Arcia and Aaron Hicks, who each went down swinging with the bases loaded.

He trailed, 4-1, through five innings, lasted a season-low six innings, but struck out nine batters, including seven of nine at one point. His ERA "skyrocketed" from 1.01 to 1.60.

(Meandering aside: The '68 Bob Gibson-like start by Buchholz this season in terms of earned run average reminded me of an incredibly absurd item of hyperbole from this year's Sports Illustrated baseball preview edition.

In the "Enemy Lines'' section for the Seattle Mariners, here is what a rival scout apparently had to say about pitching prospect Taijuan Walker:

... when Walker gets there -- he's only 20 -- he'll be there to stay. He's Dwight Gooden, Bob Gibson and J.R. Richard all in one.

Gooden, Gibson, and Richard? Like, the sum of them? That's a pretty decent pitcher. It's also a pitcher who cannot possibly exist, and to suggest a very promising 20-year-old kid is anything more than reminiscent of them at the same age is disrespectful to what they became.)

Anyway, back to Buchholz. Last night's effort wasn't a bad start so much as it was a weird start. It wasn't ace-like, that vintage, we're-not-going-to-need-the-bullpen-tonight, I'm-ending-this-losing-streak-myself statement game that Roger Clemens and Pedro Martinez were so known for during their respective Red Sox heydays. Or that Taijuan Walker presumably delivers on a regular basis for the Double A Jackson Generals.

It was just OK, a Buchholz performance that felt plucked from last year and shoehorned into this one. They ultimately won, so it was enough technically. But the Red Sox, with a weary, depleted bullpen, were hoping for more than OK. Had he been as spectacular as he had been in essentially each one of his first six starts, it would have been the most convincing piece of evidence yet that the gifted but often enigmatic 28-year-old has legitimately become a true No. 1 starter.

Instead, some questions remain. Or at least that question remains.

Drew may have gotten Buchholz off the hook in Monday's game. But he's hardly off the hook on the accusations that he has been getting creative with the baseball.

Oh, it should be noted that while Buchholz clearly did not begin the game with his best stuff, his repertoire came back to him as the game progressed. Perhaps it was because that crude cynic Jack Morris wasn't around to point it out to our averted eyes, but at no point did Buchholz appear to throw a spitter or his new alleged go-to pitch, the Super-Duper Encarnacion-Foolin'-Bautista-Left-Droolin' Resin Ball.

There were no open containers of Vaseline near the mound, no sandpaper was spied in his glove, no blowtorch, pliers or Mike Scott-endorsed power drills were to be found, and no How-To manuals authored by Gaylord Perry were spotted in his locker. He had his usual mannerisms and quirks and greasy style.

But because he wasn't as dominant as he had been before Morris and fellow ex-pitcher and current Jays broadcaster Dirk Hayhurst separately accused him of doctoring the ball during his seven-inning, two-hit gem against Toronto in his previous start, well, you know how it is. Some doubts will linger until he is similarly dominant again. That might be unfair – even a real-life Gooden/Gibson/Richard hybrid would be hard-pressed to measure up to Buchholz's first six starts – but it's how it is.

If you're looking at this objectively, you do have to give Hayhurst in particular some credence on the matter. In his excellent memoir "Out Of My League,'' Hayhurst writes with humor and insight on the lengths pitchers will go to in order to get a better grip or some extra movement on a pitch. I respect his opinion.

Do I think Buchholz was/is doing something to gain an advantage? I'd probably say no, but It wouldn't surprise me, it sure as hell wouldn't bother me (it's part of baseball's charm), and I'm not just going to dismiss it out of hand like some have done around here.

I like Joe Castiglione a lot, but he must have acquitted Buchholz a half-dozen times before the first pitch was thrown last night. Meanwhile, Gary Tanguay was wondering, on May 6, whether this will affect the MVP voting. Sigh.

And whether he is or isn't doctoring the baseball, a real advantage can be gained if he can somehow use the perception that he is to his advantage. If he can get the hitters thinking about what he's doing before the pitch, perhaps they'll lose focus on the pitch itself.

Buchholz has always had elite stuff, but his two-seamer has been downright exceptional this season. Maybe he has found a way to get a better grip or movement on it than he had before. Or maybe, having arrived in his prime, he's just better than he was before. I'm willing to consider either possibility.

His next start is Saturday against the Blue Jays. We already know what they think. I'll have a clearer sense of what I believe after that one is complete.

Remember back about 17 years ago, when geographic whiz Roger Clemens assured us he'd never leave Boston for anywhere but Texas ... then shockingly bolted to Toronto when the Jays offered the most briefcases full of cash? Don't you sort of wish the current Red Sox could do the same? You know, skip out on all trips to Texas, which never seem to go well, and just stay north of the border to beat up on the overhyped Jays?

Ah, well, the baseball schedule-maker isn't so accommodating. So here we are in May, with the Sox at 2-3 in the month – the two wins coming at Toronto, and the three losses coming in Arlington, where I don't believe they have won a series since Bump Wills was the Rangers' second baseman.

But before we move deeper into the season's second month, let's take one last look back at the first by welcoming you to Volume 2, Edition 1 of Red Sox power rankings, a wide-ranging excuse to write about the best and worst performers of the previous month as a new one gets rolling. (You'll recall, or perhaps you won't, that I did this a season ago before abandoning it when I went to London and the Red Sox went somewhere far south of there, reportedly traveling via handbasket.)

The only rule of the power rankings is that there are no rules to the power rankings. Media members, Spike Owen, prospects, front-office personnel, Jackie Gutierrez – anyone is fair game to be ranked. It's a measure of the exceptional and the unacceptable, with the middle ground unacknowledged. The top five are ranked; the bottom five are not since our pool of candidates is innumerable. Let's get to the rankings, which based on how the season started really could consist of nothing but good news ...

TOP FIVE
1. Clay Buchholz
Is a 355 adjusted ERA good? That's good, right?
To answer the question, yes, Buchholz's 355 ERA+ in April is rather good – for the sabermetrically disinclined, it means that his ERA is 255 percent better than the league average. And here's the thing – it got better with his first start in May, a seven-inning, two-hit blanking of the Blue Jays that essentially had Jays broadcasters Jack Morris and Dirk Hayhurst calling him the modern-day Gaylord Perry. Buchholz's adjusted ERA is now 427, which is pretty much unfathomable. He won't sustain this current pace, because not even Pedro Martinez could do that. But you know what? I completely believe in him. At 28 and grown up, he is the ace he was always supposed to be, and actually, subtly was in 2010, when he went 17-7 with a 2.33 ERA and a league-best 187 ERA+. Finally, the Red Sox have Buchholz in full.

2. Most of the veteran newbies
Still wish they'd signed Josh Hamilton instead?
You see what he was trying to do now, right? Ben Cherington spent the offseason signing reasonably accomplished, upper-middle-class caliber, well-regarded veterans to short deals for good money, essentially building the proverbial bridge to the future with likable players who had a reasonable, if not certain, chance of having a good year. Almost all of the signings – Mike Napoli, Shane Victorino, David Ross, Ryan Dempster, Koji Uehara, Jonny Gomes – were greeted with shrugs and skepticism. Almost all of them have contributed in a meaningful way to the Red Sox' fast start while pretty much instantly winning over the fan base. There may not be a superstar in the bunch, but they are good at their jobs and very easy to root for, and that's more than enough.

3. Manager John Farrell
And featuring Juan Nieves, Brian Butterfield, Torey Lovullo, and a coaching staff of actual grown-ups
Really, there's not much more to say than that. The Red Sox are forced to be accountable and prepared now that they are managed by someone whose first concern isn't how he's perceived or who is on his side. I don't think Farrell is flawless as a manager – I worry about overuse for Junichi Tazawa and Koji Uehara, and their aggressiveness on the bases sometimes feels reckless. But he's very good and just what they needed, and with each competent decision he makes, the choice to go with Bobby Valentine last year becomes even more of a joke.

4. Daniel Nava
He belongs
It's easy to forget – or it was easy for me to forget, anyway – that Nava was pretty damn good at the beginning of last season. Identifying him as a valuable major league player was one thing Bobby Valentine got right. Nava had a .277/.424/.477 slash line in May '12, then had a better June (.324/.419/.473). Then he understandably slowed down a little bit, got hurt, and nitwits like me raced to write him off, mistakenly giving more credence to his baseball pedigree than his performance. Lesson learned.

5. David Ortiz
Picking up where he left off, and then some
I was among those – and it felt like a minority – who were glad the Red Sox brought back Ortiz, even on a two-year deal, and even after he missed 72 games a season ago with an Achilles' injury that lingered all the way through the winter and into spring training. It was easy to forget because it felt like a long time ago, but he was one of the most effective hitters in the game last season, finishing with a 1.023 OPS – 24 points higher than that of Triple Crown winner Miguel Cabrera. The 2013 Red Sox needed someone like that in the middle of the order. But did anyone expect this? Through his first 55 plate appearances, Papi is batting .440 with a 1.313 OPS, and his 17 RBIs are good for second on the team.

BOTTOM FIVE
Will Middlebrooks
Struggling to hit the heat
How does a player who hit three homers and a double in a single game manage to own just a .389 slugging percentage through 30 games? It's quite a dubious feat, but it does tell you how much the second-year third baseman has struggled save for his one hellacious game against R.A. Dickey and the Jays April 7. In his other 29 games this season, Middlebrooks is hitting .167 with three homers and eight RBIs and a .314 slugging percentage in 108 at-bats. It's easy to say he's too talented for this to go on much longer, but what's particularly alarming is that it's not junk that's getting him out. He's struggling with fastballs. He's seeing the hard stuff 57.7 percent of the time (about five percent more often than last year), and he's 4.7 runs below average against fastballs this year after being 4.2 percent above a season ago.

Alfredo Aceves
Lunatic fringe
In case you were wondering, the One Bad Apple is 1-0 since being pointed toward Pawtucket, having allowed two hits and four walks in six innings while whiffing six in his lone start so far. You weren't wondering, were you? OK, so how about this: Tyler Cloyd of the Lehigh Valley IronPigs was the International League Pitcher of the Year last season. Perhaps being his successor is something for Aceves to strive for. With a a 6.44 ERA in the second half last year and was at a stellar 8.66 this season before his demotion, that's more likely than counting on major-league success from him anytime soon.

Stephen Drew
"The nerve to be J.D.'s brother"
Thought my colleague Peter Abraham nailed it with this blog post a few weeks ago regarding Drew, which includes the above quote as well as the reminder that he had just 18 plate appearances in spring training before suffering a concussion. It's understood why so many fans are enamored with Jose Iglesias's shiny defense – it's a joy to watch. But Drew is an above-average defensive shortstop who, when healthy, is far more well-rounded than Iglesias (currently putting up a .235/.278/.397 line at Pawtucket). And his bat is coming around – he has a .778 OPS over the past two weeks. Give him a chance. If he's anything like the player he was in Arizona, you'll like him. Even if it's begrudgingly.

Joel Hanrahan
Just do what Bailey was doing
I wasn't thrilled with the acquisition, and he hasn't pitched well ... and yet I kind of believe in him. Does that make sense? Probably not, so a quick explanation. I was skeptical that Hanrahan, whose entire six-year Major League career before this season was spent pitching for the Nationals and Pirates, had the stuff to adjust to the American League East. (I had no concerns about his makeup – his easygoing manner lends itself to quickly forgetting about a bad day.) Even though he pitched poorly before going on the disabled list a couple of weeks into the season, there were encouraging signs to be found. His average fastball velocity according to Fangraphs has been 96.8 miles per hour, second-highest of his career, and more importantly, his pitches had outstanding movement. This is not Schiraldi redux, and I'm willing to assume that his command issues were in part due to his leg injury.

I don't really have another one
I mean, they were 18-8, right?
Perhaps May will deliver more reasons for grievances. There will be some overall regression, because this team isn't winning 116 games. Maybe the Rangers series is a sign it's already happening. But overall, this is still going to be a good team, probably a very good one, and I think April ends up being a reasonable representation of who they really are. If you want to gripe about Jarrod Saltalamacchia's strikeouts or Andrew Miller's control issues or Dustin Pedroia's lack of power, go for it. I'll just take it to mean that you're an incurable cynic, because given what we've witnessed since September 2011, I know a month like the first one of this season is one to savor, not nitpick.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

It feels better than 18-7, doesn't it?

I mean, 18-7 is obviously nothing to sneeze at. The Red Sox, who open a three-game series Tuesday night against a much-hyped Blue Jays team that is already 9.5 games back in the American League East standings, own the best record in baseball, with at least two more wins and two fewer losses than every other team.

They did not collect their 18th victory last year until May 17, their 38th game. By starting so well and proving so likable – they collectively get it off the field and get after it on – the 2013 Red Sox have already put significant distance between the promise of this season and the misery of the past one.

For that we owe them a collective tip of the ball cap. It's nice to have a team again that generates cheers and good cheer alike.

It really has been an exceptional start by almost any standard other than, oh, I suppose the 1984 Tigers, winners of 35 of their first 40. And yet compared to recent history – the Sox were 11-14 at the 25-game benchmark in each of the past two uniquely miserable seasons – it feels like, I don't know, 21-4 or something.

Does that make sense? Maybe that doesn't make sense. Let's try it this way: Because of the circumstances of the past couple of seasons, the start actually feels better than it is. And it's pretty great.

Their record is excellent, their effort in resuscitating this franchise has been beyond excellent, the way they've won has enhanced the fun.

Know what else? While a four-game series against the hapless Astros, who are a Choo Choo Coleman away from being the '62 Mets, might exaggerate what a team is capable of, all of it seems entirely legitimate. Real. Sustainable.

I don't mean this particular pace – the Red Sox have a .720 winning percentage, which over 162 games translates to 116.64 wins (and, thus, 45.36 losses, I suppose). Now I don't think even the most optimistic among us expect them to come anywhere close to tying the 2001 Mariners and 1906 Cubs for the most wins in a single-season (116).

The Baseball Prospectus playoff odds this morning put the Sox's chances of making the postseason at just 72.4 percent – worse than the Yankees (74.4), actually – with a simulated win total of 88.5.

That 88-89 win range was a fairly frequent projection by those of us who believed this team was the antithesis of the Jays, one that didn't look great on paper but had sneaky depth and would mesh on the field. Now, I believe this is a 93-94 win team, and such an expectation is not unreasonable. Heck, it might be conservative. In other words, I like their odds of beating BP's odds.

Of course we know some aspects of this are not sustainable. David Ortiz's instant return to form – he did have a higher OPS than Triple Crown winner Miguel Cabrera last season – has been a stunning, pleasant surprise. But, just a hunch, the .516 batting average and 1.400 OPS probably aren't sustainable. (And Ted Williams thought .406 was a big deal.) Clay Buchholz (5-0, 1.19 ERA) won't challenge Bob Gibson's 1.12 ERA or Denny McLain's 31 wins, both from 1968. Ryan Dempster won't maintain a 12.9 strikeouts-per-nine innings ratio.

But there's no reason those players won't remain significant, even essential, contributors, particularly Buchholz, who now has the maturity to go with the stuff and should contend for the AL Cy Young award.

And many of the good things that have happened are sustainable. We all marvel at Mike Napoli's production, but his current .883 OPS is pretty much his norm – he was at .812 last year and 1.046 the year before. Dustin Pedroia has an .831 OPS this year. Career, he's at .830. Jon Lester has found his 2008-11 repertoire and form, and the results (4-0, 2.27 ERA) are no surprise. Jacoby Ellsbury hasn't hit for power yet, but he leads the league in steals and has played superb defense.

Andrew Bailey is what he was in Oakland, and suddenly, that trade doesn't look so bad. The bullpen is deep and versatile, and the rotation has Allen Webster waiting in Pawtucket should injury or inconsistency strike. On and on it goes, with many Red Sox players achieving at an impressive yet reasonable level. And the few underachievers – gotta lay off those sliders away, Will Middlebrooks – are capable of getting hot when others falter. The Red Sox are built to last, with quality depth up and down the roster, extending even to Pawtucket.

This is precisely what Ben Cherington had in mind when he brought in so many established, respected upper-middle-class caliber players this offseason. It's not a star-studded team, but it's a deep team with valuable players in appropriate roles, David Ross being another prime example. There is no roster fodder, no Aaron Cook/Daisuke Matsuzaka types taking the mound every fifth day with little chance of giving the team a chance.

The remodeled Blue Jays, with their collection of stars, were the vogue pick to win the AL East this year. As they encounter the Red Sox for the first time since April 6, I'm already ready to set my own odds and say it, 25 games into the season:

The Jays are not close to the team the Red Sox are and will continue to be, straight through the summer, to September and beyond.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Three quick strikes ...

1. A lot of Ben Cherington's moves since the end of the unfathomably dismal 2012 season are looking pretty good right now.

It's amazing how much the narrative has changed, say, on the Mike Napoli signing. He went from overpaid at three years and $39 million to damaged goods at one year and $5 million to a bargain whose hot start and surprisingly nimble defense at first base make some wish the three-year deal was still in place.

But one move that's right up there among the most encouraging occurred Wednesday night.

Alfredo Aceves.

Optioned to Pawtucket.

Love it.

I was probably in the minority in the first days of the season in believing that keeping around Aceves ? whom Peter Abraham gently referred to in his Wednesday game story as eccentric ? wouldn't be of much harm.

The one-bad-apple theory doesn't usually apply to baseball; it's when a clubhouse has three or four selfish or lousy teammates that it can metastasize and ruin a promising season. See 2001 and Mike Lansing, Carl Everett, Jose Offerman, Dante Bichette and so on. One bad guy? That can be endured, and even an asset if he's productive and his teammates take a he-may-be-lunatic-but-he's-our-lunatic approach to him.

Which is why I'm glad Aceves has been sent to Pawtucket. He blamed his teammates to some degree after his 3.1-inning, 8-run meltdown in Tuesday's 13-0 loss to the A's.

They got hacks,'' he said after the A's lit him up. "Why do we not hit?"

That's unacceptable finger-pointing from a teammate who is performing well, let alone one who made a mental error (forgetting to cover first base), a physical error (a bad throw to home plate), balked twice, and generally looked like the same borderline insubordinate lunatic that he was during the second half of last season, when he had a 6.47 ERA and allowed seven homers in 40.1 innings.

Nothing we've seen lately confirms it, but Aceves is a talented, versatile pitcher, and it's always a dangerous game to give up pitching depth. But after what happened Tuesday night – and all the various incidents and lousy performances along the way since last midseason – the speculation was that the Red Sox would literally cut their losses, remove the nuisance from the locker room, and possibly give him his release.

Instead, the did something better. They sent him to Pawtucket.

They removed him from their clubhouse and the major leagues without abandoning him altogether. If he pitches well and behaves, he'll be back, and perhaps he'll have some value again.

If he doesn't, well, McCoy Stadium is lovely in the summer.

* * *

2. ESPN prospect guru Keith Law is one of my favorite baseball writers, and not just because his Twitter avatar is a picture of pie.

He's insightful and sarcastic, preferred characteristics at this address, with a deep background in both scouting and sabermetrics. He knows his stuff, and he knows he knows his stuff, and that makes for an engaging read.

He also doesn't have much patience for nonsense, which I can relate to given the ridiculous Jose Iglesias comps/daydreams I'm pummeled with each day.

Maybe, if he's in his 6th year w/ PawSox. MT @thomasjcavalho Iggy can hit .250 with 10 HR in 3 years. Defense is stellar will steal 25 bags

— Chad Finn (@GlobeChadFinn) April 24, 2013

No. No he can't. Stop. MT @thomasjcarvalhocome on ..Iglesias can be the next Ozzie Smith. He was brutal hitting and traded to the Cards.

— Chad Finn (@GlobeChadFinn) April 24, 2013

Ozzie Smith? Osborne Earl Smith? That Ozzie Smith? C'mon. I'll take Ozzie Smith now over Iglesias. And he's 58.

Digression over. Back to Law, and this disconcerting tweet the morning after Allen Webster's debut with the Red Sox:

Not particularly. Should i have been? RT @bm_dub: @keithlaw Impressed with Allen Webster's debut?

— keithlaw (@keithlaw) April 23, 2013

Should he have been? Well, I think all of us were impressed, and rightfully. In his debut, the 23-year-old righthander who was generously gifted from the Dodgers in last year's blockbuster deal, pitched six innings, allowing five hits and two earned runs. He walked one, struck out five, and allowed a pair of homers in an eventual 5-4 loss to the Royals.

Webster touched 97 m.p.h. on the radar gun, showed a killer change-up, and left the impression that he could be the best righthanded starter to arrive from within the Red Sox system since ... well, who? Jonathan Papelbon in 2005? Aaron Sele in 1993?

(Update: Right. Clay Buchholz '07. I will now go purchase a clue.)

It's been awhile, which is why Red Sox fans probably took the encouraging results and immediately exaggerated the possibilities. (I still stand by my statement that he's a better pitcher than Josh Beckett right now.) Webster is supremely talented.

But he did give up two homers, a sign that his command isn't yet where it needs to be if expectations are to be fulfilled.

That's something, as it turns out, that Law articulated well during his write-up of Webster in his top-100 prospect rankings at the start of the season:

Webster will show three plus pitches and looks like he should be at or near the top of someone's rotation, but as a converted position player, he has struggled to develop enough fastball command to translate the raw stuff into on-field success.... I see that ceiling, but a lot of work between here and there.

I still think there's a chance he's a good No. 3 starter for this team before the summer is over. But Law is right – there's still a lot of progress that needs to be made for Webster to become what one start convinced us he could be.

* * *

3. It would be a nice story if Daniel Bard's return to the Red Sox proves more than temporary.

It will be a better story if he at all resembles what he was before September 2011. Remember, his troubles did not begin with the disastrous conversion to starting last season; he was complicit in the '11 collapse with four losses and a 10.64 ERA in 11 appearances during the final month.

There have been encouraging signs coming from Portland recently that Bard had found something resembling his past form, when he was one of the American League's premier righthanded relievers.

He didn't give up a run in his last five appearances with the Sea Dogs, and his fastball velocity was consistently in the mid-90s.

Good signs for sure. But I do wonder if the Red Sox, who have endured some attrition in the bullpen, are prematurely bringing him up at the first sign of progress rather than waiting to make sure he's right.

Those recent numbers are encouraging. They've also been accumulated over six innings, during which he walked three and struck out three, a ratio that isn't going to cut it in the big leagues.

I hope he's right, and I hope the Red Sox are right in bringing him up. But I'll believe it when we have visual evidence.

Playing nine innings while wondering if Andrew Miller is the only one who misses Bob McClure/Randy Niemann ...

1. Without even taking salary, age, or any other factor beyond current ability to effectively pitch a baseball into consideration, trading Josh Beckett straight up for Allen Webster would have been a heck of a deal for the Red Sox. Given the circumstances of how it really went down, I don't know that heist is a strong enough word. After watching Webster's debut in the Red Sox' 5-4 extra-innings loss in Sunday's nightcap versus the Royals, it would not surprise me if he's this team's No. 3 starter well before October rolls around.

2. I'm pretty sure I brought this up in my last Nine Innings column a couple of weeks ago, but it's a mea culpa worthy of reiteration: I was so wrong in dismissing Daniel Nava as a Quadruple A guy who was emblematic of the lack of major league talent late last season. He can hit quality major league pitching, and he keeps improving. He's a valuable part of this team, and I'm glad he is. Excuse me while I cease underestimating him now.

3. I've never been more enthused about a player returning to the minor leagues with a sub-.100 batting average than I am about Jackie Bradley Jr. I suppose that's damning with faint praise, but it's not intended. He wasn't ready. When he is – and it may well happen this season – he's going to be a terrific all-around player. Maybe the results weren't there, but the clues about his bright future were everywhere.

4. As far as Papi's word choices during his speech Saturday are concerned, I'll be obnoxious about it and stick to what I said on Twitter in the aftermath of his pitch-perfect moment:

As far as I'm concerned, Papi's two-year contract is worth it just for that.

— Chad Finn (@GlobeChadFinn) April 20, 2013

Sometimes the appropriate word might not be an appropriate word, if you know what I mean. Gotta love Papi.

— Chad Finn (@GlobeChadFinn) April 20, 2013

5. No, I'm not sure Ryan Dempster's 12.4 strikeouts-per-nine-innings ratio is sustainable, but he's generally been exactly what the Red Sox hoped he would be when they signed him as a free agent over the winter. A lot was made of his struggles in Texas (5.09 ERA in 12 starts last season) and whether he could adjust to the American League successfully after 14-plus years in the National League. But he actually adjusted last year – in six of his starts for the Rangers, he pitched at least six innings while giving up two or fewer earned runs. A couple of terrible starts at the beginning of his time in Arlington skewed his final stats, but overall he was better than dependable.

6. I hate to suggest any connection whatsoever between the tragedies of the past week and something as trivial (if relevant in our city's healing) as baseball. But when Jacoby Ellsbury tapped the "Boston Strong" patch on his jersey upon scoring a run Saturday, I couldn't help but wonder: Is it possible that this extremely likable team's connection with the community increases the chances that he sticks around after the season, all offers being financially equal? I've always had the sense that Ellsbury was never quite comfortable here. But the clubhouse is as good as it's been since he came up in '07, and I wonder whether he's realized that his bond with this city in the six-plus years he's been here is stronger than he knew. I'm probably reaching, but it did cross my mind.

7. Stephen Drew is batting .100 in 34 plate appearances for the Red Sox. Jose Iglesias is batting .206 in 37 plate appearances for the PawSox. Man, this is a debate no one is winning right now.

8. From what I gather, the concern in New York is that Alex Rodriguez returns to the Yankees before Derek Jeter does. At this rate, I think there's a better chance of seeing Jorge Posada in pinstripes again before either of them comes back.

9. As for today's Complete Random Baseball Card:

It's easy to see Papi and Mo as kindred spirits in Red Sox lore – they're both passionate, charismatic, emotional sluggers who aren't/weren't always perfect but who never lack/lacked for heart. Mo's note to the city he left but never left behind was a generous reminder of that.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I'm not sure the Red Sox have ever had a player -- at least one of high profile and exceptional accomplishment -- who is as downright absurd as Wade Boggs.

I mean, you don't even have to go into much detail to make the point. Key words -- Margo, Delta Force, 64 beers, willing invisible, police horse, Hair Club for Men -- should more than suffice. And Stan Grossfeld's feature on him in Wednesday's did nothing to change the perception.

At age 54, he's as charmingly, exasperatingly Wade-centric as ever. Stay gold, chicken man.

He is, however, dead-on correct about one thing: His number 26 should be retired by the Red Sox.

He fits the criteria -- 10 years with the club, Hall of Fame induction -- and besides, the Red Sox' current ownership has been willing to selectively open a loophole there when presented with the right reasons. (See No. 6, Johnny Pesky, whose name appeared on 0.4 percent of the ballots in 1960.)

But whether it's for his goofy quirks, or his later allegiance with the Yankees, or that he tried to go into the Hall of Fame as a (Devil) Ray, something has led to Boggs, a five-time batting champion in Boston, becoming the least appreciated true great in franchise lore.

Boggs was ahead of his time in that he simply did not give away outs -- sure, he was obsessed with his batting average, but he'd take a walk before swinging at a bad pitch every single time. He reached base more than 300 times in six of his first seven full seasons in Boston -- 300 times! -- and yet he was actually criticized for taking walks.

I really need to go back and see what Bill James wrote about him in his Abstracts. I suspect his perception deviated from the loudest narrative of the time, that Boggs was selfish. Well, of course he was selfish. Baseball is intrinsically selfish. That selfishness made him extremely valuable to his team -- he finished first in the American League in offensive bWAR each year from 1986-88, and was second three other seasons in Boston.

His numbers are easier to appreciate now than they were then. And his number should be retired as an appreciation of what he did then.

And while we're at it, I say these numbers should join Bobby Doerr's No. 1, Joe Cronin's (or is it Butch Hobson's?) No. 4, Pesky's No. 6, Yaz's No. 8, Ted's No. 9, Jim Rice's No. 14 (about to be unveiled in the 2009 photo above), Pudge's No. 27, and Jackie Robinson's No. 42:

Roger Clemens's No. 21: Surely neither was self-aware enough to recognize it back when they were teammates bickering over official scorers' decisions, but Clemens and Boggs are a lot alike. They're among the best ever to play their sport, have egos that exceed their extraordinary abilities, and are so clumsy in expressing why everyone else should appreciate them as much as they do that it's inevitably counter-productive to their cause when they speak. But you know ... for all of the baggage, Clemens was pretty damn great. Sure, he's a stunted, arrested, dopey-jock dolt. But he was great.

Dwight Evans's No. 24: I don't want to get into the circular he's-there-so-he-ought-to-be-there-too debate, but you know, Evans was a superior all-around player to his former teammate Rice, and there a few players in Red Sox history who are more universally appreciated by the fans. Plus, if 24 goes up there, the eternal Manny Ramirez apologists among us (hi there!) can also pretend it's for him.

Tony Conigliaro's No. 25: An appropriate homage to a local kid who due to some brutal twists of fate was turned into a lingering avatar of what-might-have-been rather than an icon of the sport. He was the Bryce Harper of his day, but with a better haircut.

David Ortiz's No. 34: Because for all he's done to change the fortunes of the franchise, he deserves more than a plaque, a truck, and a two-year golden parachute.

Pedro Martinez's No. 45: Arguably the finest starting pitcher of all-time, with a career adjusted OPS ERA of 154, second only to a certain RobotHuman closer for the Yankees. Indisputably the most charismatic, electric and fun, at least of my lifetime. He's a lock, and when it happens, that's a party I don't want to miss.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I suppose we can submit this much as circumstantial evidence that Jose Iglesias has progressed as a hitter:

His manager hasn't found it necessary to pinch-hit for him in the thick of an at-bat all season.

Of course, through all of seven games, we've already learned that such counterproductive strategic ego trips aren't John Farrell's style; they've gone the way of his predecessor, which is massive progress of another kind.

OK, now let me attempt to deliver the questions of the day with a smaller helping of snark and no more semi-gratuitous Bobby V shots:

Is the ongoing offensive evolution -- or perceived evolution -- of Iglesias, the elegant shortstop who takes away hits with ease but throughout his four-year professional career has struggled to produce them himself, legitimate?

And to take it a step further, does the 23-year-old, who was pointed south toward Pawtucket Wednesday afternoon despite a .450 batting average in 21 plate appearances, have a genuine claim on the Red Sox shortstop job that instead belongs to veteran Stephen Drew immediately upon his return from a concussion?

The answer to the latter question is available in three simple words:

No way, Jose.

I'll elaborate on that in a minute.

But let's begin with the first question:

Is Iglesias's offensive progress so far legitimate?

Well, I'm not going to dismiss it out of hand. After all, he already has more hits (9) and as many doubles (2) in those 21 plate appearances as he had during 77 PAs last year, when he had eight hits en route to an Ray Oyler-esque .118 batting average/.200 on-base percentage/.191 slugging percentage slash line.

(While 1960s/'70s Orioles defensive whiz Mark Belanger is often cited as a shortstop comparison for Iglesias, his tally of 20 home runs in 18 seasons and a .580 career OPS are statistical artifacts of a bygone era. And yet he's the high-end wishful comp for some. Oyler, who hit .135 with a .399 OPS in 247 plate appearances for the 1968 Tigers but found his lasting fame as a supporting player in "Ball Four,'' is the much more sobering comp.)

He has made some progress, and his current ZiPS projection of a .269 average and a .634 OPS would be perfectly acceptable given his Pokey Reese-quality defense. But his success in a small sample size exaggerates it, especially when you look just a little deeper at the numbers.

Iglesias is not exactly driving the ball -- five of his nine hits have not left the infield. And his batting average on balls in play -- currently standing at an insane .529, which isn't quite as insane as the .700 he had posted after the first five games -- suggests he has been far more lucky than good. (A normal BABIP is right around .300.)

It's funny, but despite Iglesias's limited major league exposure (41 games, 104 plate appearances), it seems he's actually more familiar around here than Drew, the established and superior all-around player who is making his Red Sox debut Wednesday night. It probably hasn't helped Drew's Q-rating around here that he spent the first seven seasons of his career playing out west, the first 6 1/2 in the National League.

The surname isn't an advantage in these parts either, but please don't hold it against him that he's J.D. Drew's brother. (I say that as someone who liked J.D. Drew but understands why others didn't.) Stephen Drew may not exactly be boisterous, but his passion for the game is evident, and his personality should fit with this remodeled Red Sox team that seems hell-bent on redemption and winning back the fans. To put it another way: He'll definitely react should he be at the plate when Jacoby Ellsbury steals home.

Plus, you know, when healthy, he's been pretty darned good. A gruesome ankle injury in July 2011 cost him the rest of that season and led to a prolonged road to recovery that didn't thrill Diamondbacks manager and grit aficionado Kirk Gibson. (Note: Justin Upton didn't thrill Gibson either, and he seems to be doing OK in Atlanta.) But if he can be, at age 30, a reasonable facsimile of what he was before the injury, the Red Sox will consider his $9.5 million salary a bargain. And you know what? So will you.

In 2007, his first full season, Drew had 44 extra-base hits -- or as many as Iglesias has had in his entire professional career, including the minors. The next season, Drew stacked up 76 extra-base hits -- 21 homers, 44 doubles, 11 triples -- then followed with seasons of 53 and 60 XBH before the injury in '11. He could -- should -- be a very good player, a capable defender who adds needed depth to the Red Sox lineup.

I'm looking forward to watching Drew play. Sure, it has been a pleasure watching Iglesias -- there are 155 games left in the season, and I've already run out of superlatives to describe his glove at shortstop. And stellar defense all over the field has been a factor in the Red Sox' fast start. Changing the recipe ever so slightly carries some risk of ruining the meal.

But if he goes down to Pawtucket (where he has a .589 career OPS in nearly 800 plate appearances) and proves there that he really has made progress, it seems to me the Red Sox will be left with nothing but appealing options. Stephen Drew can play. And should something go awry, Jose Iglesias and that mesmerizing glove are just a short drive away.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Playing nine innings while going all-in on the 2013 Red Sox redemption tour ...

<

1. After all of the words spent on his service time and 2019 and ridiculous hey-if-Mike-Trout-can-do-it comps from those who knew him only as a name on a prospect list before his torrid spring training, it seems like it's all working out for the best for the Red Sox regarding Jackie Bradley Jr. I mean, the ideal of course was that he'd hit, oh, 100 points below his .419 spring average and never know first-hand the charms of Pawtucket, Rhode Island. But that was unrealistic the day he boarded the plane for the opener in the Bronx, and it's unrealistic in retrospect. As talented as he is, he has just 61 games of Double A experience, and he slumped over the 2013 season's final weeks in Portland. It made sense that major league pitchers would find a weakness and expose it until he adjusts, and his weakness has proven to be inside fastballs, just as it was for a young Jacoby Ellsbury. But Bradley has foreshadowed the dynamic player he will be when he is ready -- no one will forget his debut in New York, in which he flashed his dazzling defense and worked a memorable walk (insomuch as a walk can be memorable) from savvy CC Sabathia. Provided that the good news continues to arrive regarding David Ortiz's progress, it's inevitable that Bradley heads to Triple A upon Papi's return. It's the best thing for his development, and of course if he's there for 20 days ... well, you know the service-time thing. If he progresses the way we should expect, the next time he comes to the big leagues, his stay should last for well beyond a decade.

2. I don't think it's getting ahead of ourselves to say with some certainty seven games into this thing that this is going to be a far more likable team than we've been accustomed to in recent seasons. Perhaps more important, it's shaping up to be a more patient one. Even in a game that was scoreless until the seventh, Orioles pitchers threw 124 pitches in eight innings, with starter Wei-Yin Chen throwing 36 through the first two frames. Jonny Gomes's 10-pitch at-bat in the second inning ended with a popup, but as we learned from that band of Idiots a decade ago, making a pitcher work early can lead to the scoreboard operator being busy the longer the game goes and the deeper into the bullpen the offense gets.

3. Of course, plate discipline is a work in progress for some. If Sunday's three-homer (plus a double and darned near a fourth homer in his final at-bat) stands as the most optimistic example of what Will Middlebrooks can become, his at-bat with two on and no one out in the seventh in a scoreless game was a brief reminder that there will still be some growing pains from the talented sophomore third baseman. One pitch after laying off a two-strike slider, he whiffed on a Chen slider that was well off the plate. The book on Middlebrooks last season, when he walked 13 times and whiffed 70 in 286 plate appearances, was that he would get himself out from time to time on slow stuff away. He's clearly made adjustments already and is on his way to big things, but the at-bat Monday was a reminder that there's progress still to be made.

4. Fortunately for the Red Sox, Daniel Nava broke the game open in the next at-bat. He entered Monday's game a .191 hitter with 3 homers in 131 plate appearances batting righthanded against a lefthander. But after clubbing the game-breaking, no-doubt-about-it three-run homer off Orioles lefty Wei-Yen Chen in the seventh inning, Nava is now 4 for 10 with a homer, double and a walk in 13 plate appearances against lefties this season. "I think he's done a much better job of picking out pitches that he can drive,'' said Farrell, who informed Nava Sunday that he'd get the start over slumping Jackie Bradley Jr. "He was the difference in the ballgame, obviously, and it was because of those consistent ABs.''

5. So, regarding Nava, I'm fully ready to admit my misguidance -- oh, all right, I was wrong -- when it comes to his viability as a semi-regular player on a good team. He's almost always hit when healthy, as a big leaguer and certainly through his long minor-league journey, and he's worked hard to address his weaknesses and increase his versatility. He is at least an average defensive outfielder now and he looks more than competent at first base. It seems I made the mistake so many scouts made in evaluating Nava. I underestimated him.

6. The Orioles' Chris Davis is a notorious streak hitter -- his monthly OPS last season ranged from .659 (in June) to 1.057 (in September/October). But he's carried over his hellacious conclusion to the '12 season (he had 10 homers in the final month) with an equally torrid start this year. Buchholz admittedly pitched him carefully and Davis wound up 0 for 2 with a pair of walks Monday, but he entered the game with four homers and 17 RBIs in his first 26 plate appearances of the season. The late, legendary Enzo Hernandez had five fewer RBIs in 592 more plate appearances in 1971.

7. Andrew Bailey served the role of conventional setup man with an impressive eighth (two strikeouts), but I still hold out some hope that John Farrell will use him almost as a short-relief ace this season, coming in at any point from, say, the sixth inning on when there's a high-leverage situation. The closer doesn't always record the game's most important outs. Bailey, who appears to have rediscovered the form that made him a statistical comp for Jonathan Papelbon during his three seasons in Oakland -- he has velocity and movement on his pitches that we never saw last year -- could thrive in such a role.

8. One more reminder since a couple of readers asked where he was upon noticing his absence from Monday's festivities: Dave O'Brien has shifted from calling Wednesday night games to Monday night games for ESPN, which means he'll be absent from WEEI 93.7 broadcasts on Mondays this season. Currently he's away because of his women's Final Four duties for ESPN.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

John Farrell deserves the praise he's receiving for the early success of the Red Sox pitching staff, but don't forget about the contributions of Juan Nieves. It's nice to have a pitching coach with more clout and initiative than your average substitute teacher.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Even if the afternoon had not ended with the "Dirty Water'' victory coda, Monday would have to be considered a particularly fine day at Fenway.

The weather was so perfect for the home opener that one suspected Dr. Charles Steinberg somehow discovered a way to order it in advance. The pregame ceremony paying homage to the Red Sox' beyond-admirable 60-year marriage with the Jimmy Fund was tender and heartwarming, and the presence of Pedro Martinez only added to the warm vibes.

And the 2013 Red Sox, after a year and a month of the franchise clumsily offending and alienating its fan base, took the home field for the first time this season with a 4-2 record and the sense that the players find it easy to like each other and the fans will, finally, find it very easy to like them. Judging by the overwhelming cheers in introductions, this team is fast making headway in earning forgiveness for its sluggish and petty and predecessors.

"It's an awesome group of guys, and we had fun all through the spring," said pitcher Clay Buchholz, who more than did his part in making sure "Dirty Water'' did play, pitching seven innings of three-hit, no-run ball in a 3-1 victory over the Orioles. "It's easier to come to the ballpark, in my opinion, when the team is winning and everyone is in high spirits, in good spirits, and has the same goal,

Buchholz, who threw 113 pitches and earned his second victory of the season with the welcome assistance of Daniel Nava's three-run homer in the bottom of the seventh, was masterful at times, particularly in utilizing his deceptive changeup as his out pitch en route to eight strikeouts. Yet the righthander, who has given up three earned runs in 36.2 innings since the start of spring training, was fairly subdued in assessing his performance.

"I didn't have one thing, one pitch that was working all the way through,'' Buchholz said. "It was a bit of a grind.''

If that's a grind, here's to witnessing what he considers a good start. But someone prone to understatement can recognize the truth: Of all of the positive signs that we can take away from a season that is all of 4.3 percent complete, the most encouraging is the dual reemergence of Jon Lester and Buchholz at the top of the rotation.

It was imperative that the two pitchers -- who emerged as top-of-the-rotation starters during new manager John Farrell's tenure as pitching coach and often battled inconsistency or worse in his absence -- rediscover their form. So far, they are a combined 4-0, having allowed three total runs in 26 innings.

"I really don't feel any different than I did last year,'' Buchholz said. "It's just that some little things have gone right, and it helps when Jonny goes out and sets the tone the way he did [Sunday, in a 13-0 victory at Toronto.]"

Not to get too far ahead of ourselves, but a fun win on Opening Day can make the it's-a-long-season restraint a challenge. So, we'll ask: Too soon to call it a pair of aces, John Farrell?

"They're extremely important to us, but I don't want to take away from anyone else in that rotation who is going to help us win ballgames,'' said Farrell. "We're going to go as far as that rotation takes us.

"But to have two guys at the front end of it starting the season as they are, it's set a very good tone. They're well aware that we're only seven games into this, but it's great to go out see them take control of the tempo of the game."

While Buchholz may have considered it a grind, his ability to control that tempo bought him the benefit of the doubt from his manager, who sent him out for the seventh inning despite his pitch-count being at 90.

"Even though [Matt] Wieters led off the seventh by getting on base, this was Clay's ballgame. I felt like he earned the right to get through it. He showed me he's willing to make some big pitches in key moments. It wasn't like he was losing command or his fastball was becoming more hittable."

When the top of the seventh was complete, Buchholz was at 113 pitches, having punctuated the inning with a strikeout of Steve Pearce. Four batters into the bottom half, Nava emphatically put three runs on the board, and even some mild ninth-inning suspense from closer Joel Hanrahan couldn't cloud the sunniest home opener for the Red Sox in what feels like a long, long time.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

How long has it been since I've done one of these Random Lists of Five thingies? Let's just say that in one of the more recent ones there was a reference to recently burned music CDs. Hey, at least I wasn't still using a Walkman. To the lists ...

Five seasons I could see a prime-of-career Jackie Bradley Jr. duplicating, and I'll spare you J.D. Drew's 2000 season even though it's a decent potential comp:
1. Ken Griffey Sr., 1980: Forget any sports-radio hyperbole comparing the Red Sox' phenom to Junior Griffey. If Bradley's best seasons resemble Griffey Sr.'s, which spanned 1976 to '80, his promise will have been fulfilled. Griffey's '80 season, when he hit .294 with an .818 OPS, 13 homers, 10 triples, 23 steals in 24 attempts, is the standard bearer. And Bradley will be the better defender. (Papa Griffey never won a Gold Glove.)
2. Lyman Bostock, 1977: Murdered at age 27 in September 1978, Bostock will forever remain one of the great what-ifs in baseball history. He played just four major league seasons, the finest of which was spectacular. In 1977, Bostock hit .336 with 14 homers, 62 extra-base hits, 16 steals, and an .897 OPS for the Twins before joining the Angels as a free agent over the winter. Bradley at his best projects to be more patient and a better defender but with perhaps a little lower batting average.
3. Shane Mack, 1992: Red Sox fans may remember Mack as a sore-shouldered flop with mish-mashed 1997 club, but he should be remembered for a string of outstanding seasons with the Twins in the early '90s. In '92, he hit .315 with a .394 OBP, 16 homers and 26 steals, a high-end expectation for Bradley.
4. Jose Cruz, 1983: One of the more underrated hitters of the '70s and early '80s, "Cheo" hit .318 with 14 homers, 30 steals, and a league-high 189 hits while finishing sixth in the NL MVP ballotinng.
5. Jackie Robinson, 1952: Well, the on-base percentage -- a league-best .440 -- is probably unattainable, but the .308 average with 19 homers and 24 steals is more than reasonable. And it just seems right to match him up with the most admirable of Jackies.

Top five selections in the 1990 NHL Draft:
1. Owen Nolan, Nordiques: NHL goal total: 422
2. Petr Nedved, Canucks: NHL goal total: 310
3. Keith Primeau, Red Wings: NHL goal total: 266
4. Mike Ricci, Flyers: NHL goal total: 243
5. Jaromir Jagr, Penguins: NHL goal total: 679 and counting.

Top five selections by the Bruins in the 1991 NHL Draft:
1. Glen Murray. NHL goal total: 227
2. Jozef Stumpel. NHL goal total: 196
3. Marcel Cousineau. NHL goal total. 0. But he did have an assist once.
4. Brad Tiley. NHL goal total: 0. Played 11 NHL games.
5. Mariusz Czerkawski. NHL goal total: 215

Five best draft choices, in order and weighted by where the player was selected, by the Patriots during the Bill Belichick era. (Excluding the 199th overall pick in 2000, the best pick in league history):
1. Rob Gronkowski, 42d overall, 2010: If healthy -- and I hate that if, too -- he's a game-changer, with 38 touchdowns in 43 career games.
2. David Givens, 253d overall, 2002: Had a touchdown catch in seven consecutive postseason games.
3. Vince Wilfork, 21st overall, 2004: Yeah, he was a first-rounder, but at that position, getting the ideal fulcrum for the defensive scheme was an absolute heist.
4. Aaron Hernandez, 113th overall, 2010: A tight end with a receiver's skill-set and a running back's open-field instincts.
5. Dan Koppen, 164th overall, 2003: Played 121 games at center during nine seasons in New England, had Tom Brady's utmost trust.

And the five worst, which actually could all be defensive backs:
1. Chad Jackson, 36th overall, 2006: Traded up to get the Florida receiver. Sixteen picks later, Green Bay, which traded down, chose Greg Jennings.
2. Terrence Wheatley, 62d overall, 2008: Played just 11 games for the Patriots. Are we sure he existed?
3. Shawn Crable, 78th overall, 2008: Limited to six games due to injury, mostly to his matchstick legs.
4. Ron Brace, 40th overall, 2009: How could anyone so large so often be invisible?
5. Brock Williams, 86th overall, 2001: Foreshadowed all the failed draft picks in the defensive backfield to follow.

Five basketball legends who played for the Celtics in the '70s and '80s after making their name elsewhere:
1. Ernie DiGregorio: Averaged 2.4 assists in 10.1 minutes per game in 1977-78, his final year in the league.
2. Dave Bing: Hall of Famer and Pistons great retired after averaging 13.4 ppg in 1977-78,
3. Bob McAdoo: Averaged 20.6 ppg in 20 games for dismal, fractured 1978-79 squad.
4. Tiny Archibald: Made three All-Star teams in five seasons in Boston (1979-83) and averaged 13.8 ppg for 1980-81 champs.
5. Pete Maravich: In 20 games for the 1979-80 Celtics, he averaged 11.5 ppg in his final year at age 32. Can't help but imagine what it would have been like to watch Pistol Pete at the peak of his powers play with Larry Bird.

Five partial player comments from the 1997 Baseball Prospectus annual:
1. On Mariano Rivera: "... I think he needs a better second pitch and more work. The better second pitch is a big issue, because Rivera got hit worst when he fell behind and had to come in with a fastball for a strike. Without one, I think he'll decline further this year.
2. On Trot Nixon: "One of the more overrated prospects in baseball. Nixon has more tools than Home Depot, but he uses them about as well as the government uses tax revenues. His back troubles have damaged his game as well. As Boston's #1 pick in 1993, he'll get plenty of chances to embarrass himself in the majors."
3. On Tim Wakefield: "Three years after nearly washing out of baseball, two years after nearly winning the Cy Young and just months after a temporary demotion to the pen, Wakefield may have found his niche: middle-of-the-rotation innings eater."
4. On Jeff Bagwell: "A fine defender, intelligent baserunner, and one of the best power hitters in the game. Still looks like an adult Bud Bundy ...."
5. On David Ortiz: "... He is very young, and the Twins may want him to have more than a half-season at Double A before they hand him a starting job in the majors, but his upside is very high. Think Dave Parker."

Five players chosen in the first round of the 1995 NHL Draft:
1. Bryan Berard, defenseman, No.1 overall, Ottawa
2. Wade Redden, defenseman, No. 2 overall, NY Islanders
3. Kyle McLaren, defenseman, No. 9 overall, Boston
4. Jarome Iginla, forward, No. 11 overall, Dallas
5. Petr Sykora, forward, No. 18 overall, New Jersey

Five players drafted ahead of Rajon Rondo (21st overall) in the 2006 NBA Draft:
1. Adam Morrison, Charlotte, No. 3 overall: Hey, he did win two championships with the Lakers. He also scored a total of 84 points over those two seasons.
2. Shelden Williams, Atlanta, No. 5: Go ahead. Make the shoulda-drafted-Candice Parker joke. I'll wait.
3. Patrick O'Bryant, Golden State, No. 9: I remember the precise moment I knew he was never going to be a viable backup for the Celtics -- when spent pregame warmups during a game against the Raptors trying to beat Big Baby Davis with crossover moves.
4. Mouhamed Sene, Seattle, No. 10
5. Oleksiy Pecherov, Minnesota, No. 19.

Five most talented receivers (in order) to play for the Patriots since I began paying attention in 1978:
1.Randy Moss (2007-10). 52 games, 50 touchdowns.
2. Terry Glenn (1996-2001). Made it look so easy when he was in the right frame of mind. Telling that when Troy Brown was asked last season which former teammate of his the '12 Patriots could use most, he cited No. 88.
3. Irving Fryar (1984-92).Watch out for those Foxborough trees.
4. Stanley Morgan (1977-89). 534 catches at 19.4 per
5. Wes Welker (2007-12). No, he wasn't a deep threat. But he somehow managed to be an upgrade on the great Troy Brown as a slot receiver, and that's a tribute to his talent as well as his oft-cited determination.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

A few notes on the lineup card from an Opening Day that played out like the script had been co-written by John Farrell and Tom Werner ...

Well, if you weren't already in baseball love with Jackie Bradley Jr. or at the very least the hope the charismatic young outfielder represents, I suspect you joined the majority Monday.

Three walks, two runs scored, a RBI, and a superb catch in a suspenseless 8-2 victory? A heck of first (regular-season) impression, especially for a kid making his big league debut on the Bronx stage. If he can make it there ... well, you know.

Whether you believe he should have started the season with the team or gone to Triple A for nine games and an extra year of team control is irrelevant now. The hope here is that he spends the entire season in Boston. If he's sent down later in the season, it will likely be for one of two reasons: He's struggled, or it's strictly for financial purposes.

His performance Monday was particularly encouraging because he made a huge contribution without delivering a hit, something that will be necessary as he adjusts to the difference between Double A and Major League pitching.

The office got quiet Monday every time he came to the plate -- his debut after his sizzling spring was must-see TV. The expectations are immense for this extremely likable kid, and while he can probably handle them, please know that he's not going to be Mike Trout or Bryce Harper. His peak will be closer to Ken Griffey Sr.'s peak numbers than Ken Griffey Jr's.

Which, by the way, is an excellent player. That might have been the best thing about his debut -- his contributions were all tied to his strengths. He made an outstanding catch in left field, and I suspect he could field a live grenade better than Jonny Gomes fields a line-drive single.

His first plate appearance, in which he worked a walk after Sabathia got ahead 0-2, was the best indication we could ask for that his patience (he has a .423 on-base percentage in the minors) might translate immediately to the big leagues. And that indication was bolstered by two more walks. He saw 27 pitches in his four at-bats, which is downright remarkable for a kid making his big league debut.

I'm still not sure he'll hit immediately. But he sure knows a ball from a strike, and that discerning ability paired with his golden glove should make him an asset long beyond Monday after noon. No, this won't be the last time early in this new season that we'll use remarkable to describe Bradley's contribution.

* * *

So about the ballgame: One win down, 161 games to go, and at the very least we know this won't be the third straight season the Red Sox begin 0-for-6.

I wrote this morning about this team's quest for redemption and winning back the faith of the fans, and Game 1 was an encouraging step in such a direction.

It really did go according to what the Red Sox' blueprint for victory ought to be. They were patient at the plate (eight walks), got timely hits from unlikely sources (that's exactly what a Jose Iglesias three-hit game will look like), and ran the bases aggressively (is Jonny Gomes actually a smart baserunner?).

The defense was superb -- Bradley/Ellsbury/Victorino will be the enemy of wannabe doubles and triples -- and the pitching kept the drama to a minimum. Jon Lester went toe-to-toe with CC Sabathia for five innings, struck out seven, escaped a jam in the fourth inning without getting distracted, and emerged with the victory.

The bullpen was even better, delivering a clue that it is fully capable of easing the responsibility of the rotation, with Koji Uehara, Andrew Miller, Junichi Tazawa, Andrew Bailey, and Joel Hanrahan combining for four innings of one-hit pitching. It was an impressive display of versatility and velocity.

And you know how you can tell it's been a very good afternoon of baseball for the Red Sox? When the mass exodus begins from Yankee Stadium well before the final out is recorded.

* * *

Seeing that patchwork Yankees lineup in action is just ... weird, and if not for the overall good vibes of Opening Day, I'd probably use a crueler adjective than weird.

It's not the same without Derek Jeter, whose ETA on his return from his October ankle injury isn't far from being on the David Ortiz Who The Heck Knows When I'll Be Back timetable.

The 4-5 combination of Kevin Youkilis and the ghost of Vernon Wells goes a long way toward making Red Sox fans feel pretty good about their Mike Napoli-Will Middlebrooks tandem.

Jayson Nix? Francisco Cervelli? Pinch-hitter not-so-extraordinaire Lyle Overbay? Are we sure this isn't a split-squad team? (OK, so Nix and Cervelli had their moments. To which I say: Altuve-sized sample size.)

I'm still getting used to Ichiro in pinstripes. I'll never get used to the beardless Yankeefied Kevin Youkilis, or for that matter Yoouuuuk!!! chants at Yankee Stadium.

Probably confuses the heck out of Joba Chamberlain.

* * *

I usually leave my various baseball pet peeves in the bat rack on Opening Day, but there is one that crossed my mind during Monday's game due to Red Sox lineup circumstances:

Switch-hitters who are particularly ineffective from one side of the plate. At some point, the versatility becomes counterproductive. Daniel Nava is fine as a lefthanded hitter against righties, but he has a .191/.302/.318 slash-line batting righthanded against lefties. That's not acceptable for Jose Iglesias, let alone a corner outfielder.

I bring this up because while I understand why the Red Sox started Jarrod Saltalamacchia behind the plate -- he's the incumbent, he was the team's 2012 home run leader, he's become a respected veteran -- the better play might have been to go with David Ross.

He's the superior defensive catcher by far, and Salty hit .170/.211/.283 batting righthanded against lefty pitchers last season. I know, that's nitpicking on a day of circumstance, and Salty did reach base four times, but I am curious whether Ross, who is slated to be in the lineup for Game 3 against Andy Pettitte, does play against the majority of -- if not all -- lefty starters.

* * *

I'm almost convinced Eduardo Nunez was an actor hired by Derek Jeter to make him look like a spry, young defensive shortstop by comparison ... Dustin Pedroia appeared to dodge a serious thumb or hand injury after sliding headfirst into first base in the ninth inning. Enough with the foolish Mike Greenwell stuff ... NESN flashed Mike Napoli's 2011 stats (30 homers, .320) while identifying them as his '12 numbers (when he went .227, 24) a couple of times. Readers noted that they did the same thing for Shane Victorino, who finished 13th in the NL MVP balloting two years ago then struggled last year. I'd suggest it was a harmless mistake, but it is odd that it happened multiple times ... Joba Chamberlain's mustache is illegal in at least a dozen states ... Is it me, or do Youk and Travis Hafner both look like streamlined versions of their former selves? Must be the slimming nature of the pinstripes ... Just when Andrew Miller had me thinking "heal up, soon, Craig Breslow," he sends Robinson Cano back to the dugout with a 97 mph fastball. He can be exasperating when his command is on the fritz, but he was dependable last year, and there aren't many lefties with the stuff to blow away a hitter of Cano's accomplishment ... Baseball is back, the Sox are undefeated and the Yankees winless. Pretty much the definition of good sports day, no?

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Perhaps the anticipation for the new baseball season truly has been altered by the animosity – that is, from the fans to the Red Sox themselves, who have worn a greasy stench of disappointment since September 2011. A fresh start doesn't instantly delete the old frustrations, especially when they are not particularly old and not yet forgotten.

If the aggravation-turned-apathy of Bobby Valentine's Summer of Self-Made Brushfires carried through the winter, well, that's understandable, and reparations are going to require more than a few $5 beers and a tribute song by a crooner whose style teeters on parody to make it feel all better again.

Once the – insert air quotes here – sellout streak ends inevitably in the immediate days after the April 8 home opener, I half expect chief operating office Sam Kennedy to show up beneath former season ticket holders' bedroom window, wearing a trench coat and holding a boom box in the air in an attempt to win back their adoration and cash. Let's just hope the song he's playing is "In Your Eyes" and not "At Fenway." That would be one more awkward miscalculation by this franchise, though certainly more forgivable than thinking Valentine was any kind of solution to what ailed them. But as tone-deaf as they sometimes may seem, at least they recognize many of you need to be won back. That's progress.

In a smaller way, perhaps there's also a shrunken animosity for that familiar opponent on this Opening Day in the Bronx, one that has dulled that anticipation. An aging and battered roster has left the Yankees in the most unfamiliar of positions: As an underdog within the division they've ruled. Maybe that eagerness for the start of baseball season is dulled and tempered by that new conventional wisdom – that it's more likely that the Red Sox and Yankees spend the summer battling to stay out of last place than trading three-run homers (and maybe even a few right jabs, Fisk-Munson style) as they duke it out for first.

There is no Derek Jeter on the lineup card for the Yankees Monday, no David Ortiz for the Red Sox for who knows how long, and the only pinstriped reminder of that most perfect Opening Day of 2005 is Mariano Rivera, the regal closer who happens to be the last active player born in the 1960s.

Rivera is looking for a personal redemption as he returns from a knee injury and attempts to close out his career on his own terms. He wants one more final scene, one more ninth inning to dominate, and while his quest is born from a different desire, it's not entirely different from what the Red Sox are searching for collectively and individually in 2013.

Who requires or is searching for redemption on this year's Red Sox? It might be easier to name the few who aren't, though we will take the longer route.

Foremost, there's Dustin Pedroia, who is trying to prove that his now-infamous "That's not how we do things around here" comment last April is not an indication that he's part of the problem. And he is not – it was disheartening how easily so many dismissed all that he had done the previous five seasons, that he requires redemption at all. I can't reprimand him for recognizing the ship was going to sink before they hit the iceberg. Don't we know what this guy is all about by now, that he's a great ballplayer and teammate?

There is Ortiz, who had more years added to his contract (two) than games played (one) since July 16. Jacoby Ellsbury needs to avoid high-impact collisions and overcome the impression that he won't play unless he's 100 percent. Jon Lester wouldn't be blamed for petitioning to remove his 2012 stat line from the back of his baseball card. Clay Buchholz is still searching for the consistency that would make him a top-tier starter.

Andrew Bailey was injured and lost in '12 to the point that he almost seems like a newcomer to the roster. And virtually all of the actual newcomers – Mike Napoli, Shane Victorino, and Stephen Drew most notably – are trying to overcome the perception that they are aging or injury prone, a perception that follows them here from their last baseball home. Even manager John Farrell, whose departure made him a public enemy in Toronto, a city not recently known for holding passionate baseball grudges, has plenty to prove.

If the majority of question marks end up having suitable answers – not an unreasonable request – this team does have a chance to be a pleasant surprise, not only a likable, rootable team but a good team.

Lester and Buchholz must justify their top-of-the-rotation status, and the spring was encouraging in that regard – they combined to give up four earned runs in 46.2 innings. The lineup lacks star power in Ortiz's absence, though it should be remembered Ellsbury and Pedroia both finished in the top 10 in the AL MVP balloting just two seasons ago (the same season Victorino was 13th in the NL voting), and they were fifth in the league in runs last season despite the junior varsity lineup the final six weeks.

The defense will be excellent on days that Jackie Bradley Jr., Jose Iglesias, and David Ross are in the lineup, the bullpen is deep and versatile, and the rotation, while hardly reminiscent of the 1993 Atlanta Braves, has no Aaron Cooks and Daisuke Matsuzakas among them. At the least they'll be competent, with wild-card contention a reasonable wish.

Still, the Sox are 76-113 since September 1, 2011, Fenway has not hosted a playoff game since 2009, and so the buzz around the Red Sox is that there really isn't much buzz at all by usual standards, save for the Florida ascent of the prospect Bradley, an irresistibly likable 22-year-old outfielder who has somehow become part of the bridge year rather than its destination. He'll be fun, though I fear his skill-set beyond his spectacular defense may be too subtle to meet the massive expectations brought on by his .419 spring batting average and the desire to discover something, anything exciting and new about this Red Sox team.

Bradley is poised to be the center fielder and a center piece on that "next great Red Sox team," as Ben Cherington sometimes puts it. He's arrived sooner than expected. On Opening Day, it shouldn't be too much to hope that redemption for the franchise will too. It's a long road, but the end of the bridge isn't too far away. For now, until the Red Sox are formidable again, a redemption song is a much more appealing theme than chicken-and-beer or the managerial misadventures of Bobby V.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com columnist

So the Red Sox have apparently put Jackie Bradley Jr. at 50-50.

I suppose, given the overwhelming hype engulfing the feel-good story of Red Sox spring training, that I should be more precise. So here it is: 50/50 stands as the charismatic 22-year-old outfielder's chances of making the team out of camp, and not projected totals for his home runs and stolen bases this season.

I've been through this a few times already this spring, so I'll give you the condensed version here: I understand why Red Sox fans want to see Bradley in the big leagues now. His talent is obvious even to casual observers. He's had a marvelous spring at the plate. He's spectacular defensively.

And while this is an apparent bridge year for the franchise, with a shot at the second wild-card probably their most realistic best-case outcome even for those of us who tend to see the sunny side, any chance to accelerate across that bridge is tempting. We want to see these prospects we're hearing about now; this isn't 1986, when faithful Baseball America subscribers and Peter Gammons were about the only ones among us who could pick Ellis Burks out of a lineup of New Britain Red Sox.

Still, the notion that the Red Sox keep prospects in the minors too long is one you hear from time to time, and it's silly. Just because Will Middlebrooks succeeded upon arrival last year doesn't mean he would have thrived had he arrived sooner. He needed to master Triple A first, and he did. They played it right with him, just as they did with Jacoby Ellsbury (whose 2006-07 ascent is a perfect comp for what Bradley's should be) and so many before.

I get why so many fans are rooting for the 50 percent of the equation that has Bradley in left field at Yankee Stadium on April 1. Heck, watching Bradley play center field and never punt away a plate appearance (at least before his late-season slump) was the best thing about attending Portland Sea Dogs games last summer. I hate being put in the position of arguing against Bradley in any way. I love the player. He's a genuine, nice kid. He'll be a Gold Glove center fielder and a productive No. 2 hitter at his peak, maybe more than that.

Barring catastrophe, he's going to be a wildly popular core player here for a long time. But I don't understand why so many insist that time should begin right now, when an 11-day trip to Pawtucket during a season in which championship aspirations are a daydream would delay his arbitration clock and delay free agency for a year. If the question is would you rather have him for 11 days now at age 22 or a full year during his prime, isn't the answer obvious? Did I mention he's repped by Scott Boras?

The answer should be obvious, even if it means there's two weeks of delayed gratification. But I'm not sure it is to the majority. An emailer suggested Thursday that sending down Bradley for 11 days could cost the Red Sox 3-4 wins. Such a suggestion is absurd -- if he's that valuable, that means he'd roughly have five times the value of 2012 Mike Trout over the course of the season.

That would be a fairly decent ballplayer right there. That would also be humanly impossible.

After that correspondence and others like it the past few weeks, as Bradley has hit and hit and hit (albeit against what Rob Neyer noted was mostly Triple A caliber pitching), I figured I'd go to Twitter and do a little crowd sourcing. The question, as you'll unfortunately see on each of these tweets, was a simple one, paraphrased as this: Give me a player you think Bradley will equal now, and one he'll be similar to in the future.

There were lots of Dwayne Hoseys from the wise guys, absolutely no Wayne Housies, even a RIch Becker and a Lee Tinsley. (I actually think Damon Buford during his one decent season with the Sox is a reasonable expectation at the beginning).

I'm also further convinced that many of us are mixing up his upside with that of elite prospect Xander Bogaerts, Bradley is not a burner (he had 24 steals last year between High A and Double A), and his power might get to 18-20 homers. Those who look at him and see Kenny Lofton or Rickey Henderson -- even facetiously -- really aren't looking at him at all.

Anyway, here's a breakdown of some of the responses into a couple of different categories. I'd love to hear yours in the comments. (And then I will silently judge you.)

WISHFUL THINKERS, JOKERS, AND RANDOM LUNATICS

@globechadfinn Better than Ellsbury now and better than Ellsbury later. However, he should still spend 3 weeks in Pawtucket. #cheaperseats

� Dave LaPointe (@dave_lapointe) March 22, 2013

Ellsbury can be frustrating, but he did hit 32 homers one year and steal 70 bases another. Doubtful Bradley will come close to the former, and there's no chance he approaches the latter without undergoing a transplant to have Tim Raines's legs from 1981 attached.

@globechadfinn Young Willie Mays and Willie Mays in his prime :)

� Mark Hamilton (@hambino78) March 22, 2013

I believe this was an Ask Nick question at one point.

@globechadfinn OBVIOUSLY Ken Griffey Jr. I mean really.

— Bryant Durrell (@BryantD) March 22, 2013

Well, they do have the Junior thing in common.

MEDIA DUDES

LaSchelle Tarver now. Mickey Mantle 11 games into the season.

� David Wade (@davidwade) March 22, 2013

@globechadfinn Tris Speaker now, Willie Mays later #toomuch ??

� Michael Giardi (@MikeGiardi) March 22, 2013

@globechadfinn Desmond Jennings now, 2010 Carl Crawford at his peak?

� Randy Scott (@RandyScottESPN) March 22, 2013

He'll never run like Crawford. But Jennings with better defense -- Bradley's glove cannot be exaggerated -- and a higher on-base percentage is a reasonable expectation. I think he'll be better than Jennings, actually.

NOW HERE ARE SOME INTERESTING COMPS

@globechadfinn Lyman Bostock-Denard Span

� Thomas Carvalho(@ThomasJCarvalho) March 22, 2013

He clarified that he meant Span now and Bostock, whose death at age 27 in 1978 is one of baseball's great tragedies, as a peak player. Bostock is a really fascinating high-end comp. He was good defensively but didn't have Bradley's center field glove. He wasn't particularly patient, but his statistics in his breakthrough '77 season -- a .336 average, 14 homers, 36 doubles, 12 triples and 16 steals -- could be something that Bradley matches at his peak.

@globechadfinn I'm in the send him down camp.Player now - Cameron Maybin.Player peak: Kenny Lofton

� Player Wives (@playerwives) March 22, 2013

He'll be better than Maybin. He could be Lofton, but with a fraction of the speed.

@globechadfinn Let's be realistic guys...I see him as a mix of Austin Jackson and Torii Hunter by his peak which isn't far away.

� Patrick Kelly (@PKellyMLB) March 22, 2013

Jackson's interesting. But Hunter hit at least 26 homers five times. Bradley has a better chance of hitting five homers 26 times.

@globechadfinn John Jay now? Alex Gordon/Shin-Soo Choo peak?

� Steve Bennett (@Sbennett15) March 22, 2013

@globechadfinn: ZIPS says "Rich Becker": fangraphs.com/blogs/index.ph?

� steve o'grady (@sogrady) March 22, 2013

That's this year's projection for Bradley, and the Sox ones are fascinating. And while we hope and should believe Bradley will have a much better career, Becker did have his moments (12 homers, 19 steals, .372 OBP, .801 OPS for the '96 Twins). Of course, that occurred after posting an OPS of .678 at age 22 and .599 at 23.

@globechadfinn Bjorn Borg

� Hunter Golden (@HunterGBaseball) March 22, 2013

We have a winner.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Hard to believe Opening Day is less than two weeks away, but I suppose that's the default mindset when your day begins with a no-school call and a glance out the window confirming that, yes, the oblivious plow guy ran down the mailbox one more time for all the old times. Sigh.

I suspect you agree with me that real baseball and all that it brings with it cannot get here soon enough.

Fortunately, it really is true that Opening Day in the Bronx is just 13 days away, and it's also true that the Red Sox are beginning to take shape as a flawed but likeable team that with a few overdue breaks could legitimately contend in the American League East, a division in which Toronto is the favorite but nobody is close to perfect.

This very probably will not be a championship season. But it could be a fun one. Which reminds me: One more thing before we take a look at the current status and potential resolutions of five key issues that the Red Sox as spring training dawned.

Jackie Bradley Jr. should not break camp with the big league team. Yes, his hellacious spring has been the most enjoyable story of camp, and as I wrote last year when he was making a wonderful impression upon his arrival at Double A Portland, he's going to be a player Red Sox fans adore for a long time.

But keeping him out of camp (and presuming he sticks all year) would cost a year of service time -- and given that his agent is Scott Boras, that probably means he goes to free-agency when the time comes.

If you send him down to Triple A, where he is yet to have a plate appearance, for just 11 days, he'll hit free agency a year later than he would if he makes the team. As I've written, I tend to think the Jacoby Ellsbury 2006/2007 path is the one Bradley should and will follow. Punting away a year of service time now, just to avoid waiting those 11 days, while playing him in left field where his immense defensive value will be negated, is downright foolish, especially what is set up to be a bridge year.

And please don't cite his spring stats as a reason he should stick. As the excellent Stephen O'Grady pointed out, the Red Sox' last three leading hitters in spring training, from 2010-12, were Jeremy Hermida, Oscar Tejada, and Darnell McDonald. This paragraph is brought to you by Small Sample-Size Theatre.

Bradley has made a wonderful impression, a recurring theme with him. But sending him down is the smart business move, and it's probably also the correct baseball move. Just a little patience, Red Sox fans. He'll be here soon enough, and he'll stay a little longer.

Redundant diatribe over. Now, as for those other five spring issues and where they currently stand ...

The left field logjam: We'll start with this one since we already laid it out on Bradley, whom many would prefer to be the everyday guy from the get-go, especially since Jonny Gomes is likely to fill in at designated hitter for perma-gimpy David Ortiz. Again, send Bradley down for those 11 days to two weeks. Find out if you have a piece worth keeping around in Mike Carp, who two years ago had a 125 adjusted OPS and 12 homers in 79 games for Seattle. Find out whether Daniel Nava, a league-average player last year, can get on-base at a .370 or so clip now that he's healthy. Find out whether Gomes can play left field at something resembling a Manny Ramirez-level � in other words, not gracefully, but entirely ineptly, either. Take two weeks to take inventory, and then, if you don't like what you see, well, it's a short drive up from Rhode Island for young Mr. Bradley.

Mike Napoli and his degenerative hip: Dude looks fine to me. He has two mammoth homers in 25 plate appearances with a 1.052 OPS. Again, small-sample size and spring stats really don't matter and all of the other disclaimers, but at the very least, he looks like the exact same swing-for-the-fences slugger who tormented Red Sox pitching all those years. Every fierce swing backs up his statement that the degenerative hip condition is something that he's not physically aware of at this point. I'm setting the over/under at 28 homers.

David Ortiz and the endless Achilles issue: I don't really know what else to say beyond this:

When in doubt, always go with Ted Knight.

I mean, Papi's purgatory as he struggles to recover from his Achilles' injury and its lingering effects is the most frustrating story from camp, and there's no resolution in sight after his 5-7 day rest period apparently did not have the intended effect.

Would anything surprise you right now? You could tell me he'd have season-ending surgery a week from now or be batting cleanup on, say, April 10, and I'd be inclined to believe you either way.

Shortstop: Before he blew apart his ankle in 2011, Stephen Drew was fairly durable, playing at least 150 games in three of four seasons from 2007-10. But he's been limited to just 18 plate appearances this spring because of lingering post-concussion symptoms, and so it's become easy for Red Sox fans who grew frustrated with his brittle brother J.D. during his five seasons in Boston to presume this Drew will also require his name to be written on the lineup card in pencil.

His current status is certainly concerning � he's been out 12 days now and is planning to visit with a concussion specialist in Pittsburgh � but I still believe he'll ultimately prove to be one of the Red Sox' better signings during the offseason.

For the time being, though, smooth Jose Iglesias is getting a chance to prove that he'll hit enough to justify a spot in the lineup. He's at .220 this spring, and he's so brilliant defensively that if he can hit 20 or 30 points above the Mendoza Line in the big leagues, many won't want to see him head back down to Pawtucket when Drew, a very good player, returns.

The starting rotation: The biggest issue, bar none, facing the Red Sox entering the new season was the state of the front end and middle of the rotation. Jon Lester was abysmal in 2012 by his usual standards. Clay Buchholz was inconsistent. Ryan Dempster was in Texas via Chicago, and John Lackey was injured.

This spring, save for Felix Doubront's poor conditioning and swingman Franklin Morales's balky back, there have been extremely encouraging signs that the rotation is headed for a season of recovery and maybe even redemption.

Whether it's the return of Farrell, under whom Lester and Buchholz developed into excellent major league pitchers, or the addition of bright, communicative pitching coach Juan Nieves, or simply professional pride taking place and refusing to allow another embarrassing letdown of a season, it's apparent that the members of the Red Sox' rotation are determined to provide a better collective effort than it did a season ago.

And that is the best sign we've seen this spring that the new season that somehow begins in 13 days will be more fun and perhaps even more fulfilling than any season in awhile.

Don't forget: Chat at 2:30. So, you know, 2:35 ... 2:38 at the latest.

Today's media column on the Bruins' massive ratings on NESN is here. Talked to Andy Brickley, not exactly a disinterested observer, about why he believes fans in Boston came back so quickly after the lockout. Here is one thought from Brick that I didn't use in the column, on how the accessibility of the players seemed to accelerate the fans' forgiveness.

"One of the things you try to do is expose these guys so that the fans get to know these players and their personalities,'' said Brickley. "I don’t think a Belichickian approach works in hockey. Everybody knows that hockey players are salt-of-the-earth people. But they’re in the community, and fans have access. They live in town and are out and about in town but they live the right way. They’re out amongst their fanbase and you get to know them. That matters to people."

Because today's column was a one-topic deal, here are a few items I wanted to touch on but didn't have the room. I may make this a regular Friday feature. Consider them the deleted scenes:

ESPN formally announced the hiring of Ray Lewis as an NFL analyst/personality this week, a story Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch was all over several weeks ago. While his history makes him something of a controversial choice, his appeal to ESPN is obvious -- he's a truly great player with the charisma to succeed. I'm curious how they'll use him -- I supect he'll be turned into a fake-preaching cartoon character designated to give "inspirational speeches'' to various teams and players. I do hope he's not a significant part of the "Monday Night Football'' broadcast -- Mike Tirico and Jon Gruden tandem is just fine as is. And it will probably be an adjustment for Lewis, getting less camera time now in an actual TV gig than he did all those years playing to the cameras before, during, and after Ravens games.

The NFL Network apologized Wednesday, a day after someone on their set -- believed to be Warren Sapp -- commented in less-than-network-friendly language about a segment that was underway featuring Scott Pioli discussing the Patriots' philosophy in team-building. While Pioli, who worked in the Patriots front office under Bill Belichick during the three Super Bowl victories, was talking with host Scott Hanson, Sapp The Voice could be heard whispering, “It’s the same [expletive] segment we had Mike Lombardi do. The [expletive] Bill Belichick [expletive] angle.” Chris Rose presented the apology, saying in part, "Last night during some live programming, we accidentally aired an expletive. It will not happen again." I suppose the apology was necessary, but what the network should really apologize for is continuing to employ Sapp. It's obvious why information about the Patriots matters -- insight about what they do and how they've maintained their run of success for more than a decade is at a premium. No one is asking much about the 2002 Tampa Bay Bucs these days, you know?

The rumor that Bob Ryan is co-hosting a show on 1510 is not accurate. He is doing six hits a week with Marty Tirrell on Yahoo! Sports Radio's "Calling All Sports,'' which is broadcast on 1510. But it's not a full-time thing, and he says he doesn't want one. He is expected to join Sean Grande as the color analyst on the Celtics-Bobcats game Saturday night on WEEI, possibly in an every-other-quarter role with ESPN's Ryen Russillo. They will be filling in for Cedric Maxwell, who is being honored by the Atlantic-10.

Regarding Bill Simmons's three-day Twitter suspension by his ESPN bosses for a series of tweets criticizing Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman's battle with Skip Bayless on the abomination known as "First Take,'' I'll stick to what I more or less said on ... well, Twitter. Maybe as an employee Simmons should have had more discretion, and I'm sure he was warned before. (He was previously suspended for ripping WEEI, which has a partnership with ESPN). But man, was he ever right. Kudos to him for speaking the truth.

Dale Arnold, Gerry Callahan, and Kirk Minihane is a very good show. As we heard this morning, Callahan and Minihane alone (with the latter handling getting in and out of the breaks and other duties that the absent John Dennis does well) might be even better. If there was any concern before this week regarding how to repair the morning show, there shouldn't be now. Seems to me they've found two solutions.

Looking for a Ted Sarandis update? You know you have, and we've got one for you. The former voice of Boston College basketball and WEEI evening host (among other gigs) will debut a new college basketball program on WATD 95.9 beginning this Sunday at 9 p.m. Titled "College Basketball Tonight,'' it is co-hosted by former BC coach Al Skinner and will air through the end of the month. It also will be streamed online at hoopville.com.

Jerry Remy won't be part of NESN's spring training Red Sox broadcasts over the weekend. The network said it is because of a previously planned family commitment. Jim Rice will fill in tonight against the Twins. It's one of their co-produced telecasts, so Twins analyst Ron Coomer will team up with Rice. Don Orsillo will split time with Twins play-by-play announcer Dick Bremer. Orsillo and Rice will handle Sunday's game with the Rays. Guess a Rays legend like Ryan Rupe, Tanyon Sturtze or Julio Lugo wasn't available to share the booth.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I don't think it requires high levels of cynicism in the bloodstream to have heard the Red Sox' recent explanation for sore-heeled David Ortiz's scheduled five-to-seven-day hiatus and immediately mutter: ''Right. More like five to seven weeks."

I suppose any time the Red Sox' medical team concludes a diagnosis without alienating a player is a victory nowadays. But let's just say Monday's acknowledgement that Ortiz, who was limited to just 90 games last season after suffering a slight tear in his right Achilles' tendon, will probably begin the season on the disabled list hardly comes as a surprise.

Ortiz has had exactly four plate-appearances since last July 16. He arrived, understandably if not justifiably, in a condition that suggested there were more limits put on cardio than on calories. Every time he has tried to get rolling, his heels have barked that they're not ready for this.

It's baseball purgatory, Big Papi's personal Groundhog Day, and considering that he was ticked off when they put him on the disabled list roughly seven months ago, his unusually glum mood is confirmation that it is incredibly frustrating to still not be quite right.

There seems to be confidence that the week of rest will result in the pain going away, but even should that happen, they should not rush to make sure he's anchoring the lineup on April 1 in the Bronx. In fact, if there's a positive to take from this, it's that the Red Sox appear to be on the verge of doing the right thing and shutting down Ortiz, with no intention of playing him until they are certain he is healthy enough to help in the required, major way.

Of course, some fans have already grown impatient waiting for him to make his spring debut, and a common question aimed this way recently has been some version of this: "Why did they even bring him back in the first place?"

Now, I understand why there might be a skeptical undertone to such a question -- part of his appeal is his marketability, given that the franchise doesn't exactly have a lot of marquee names to appease NESN right now, though Mike Carp seems a natural for a Charlie Moore appearance. Synergy, you know.

But the very real baseball reasons for Ortiz's return on a two-year, $26 million deal should be plainly obvious:

He was a remarkably productive hitter last season.

And the Red Sox need him.

It's lost in the aftermath of the Red Sox' miserable season, but when healthy, Ortiz was practically as good as he has ever been last year. His 1.026 OPS was the third-best of his career, behind his 2006 (1.049) and 2007 (1.066) seasons and ahead of his fairly memorable ....

... 2003 (.961) and 2004 (.983) seasons. His 171 adjusted OPS tied the best of his career (2007), and even with his abbreviated season (not to mention that he has no value other than as a batter), Fangraphs put his value at $13.3 million.

This is not the equivalent of throwing five years at John Lackey or seven at Carl Crawford. It's a two-year deal for reasonable money. Is there risk? Obviously, and perhaps we are headed for a worst-case scenario. But at just two years, the Sox will survive just fine. This isn't Bobby Jenks. It's a risk they were right to take.

His importance was painfully apparent when he was out last year -- they were over .500 when he went down, and 23-49 thereafter -- and there surely will be reminders of how essential he remains to this lineup in his early-season absence.

The Red Sox' lineup this season will be better than than the current conventional wisdom. They were fifth in the American League in runs last year -- one spot ahead of potent Detroit -- despite all that went wrong. They have greater lineup depth than they had a season ago, and with the presumed return to health of Jacoby Ellsbury, Dustin Pedroia, and Will Middlebrooks, they'll score enough runs to win on most nights.

But they need Ortiz as that anchor. Mike Napoli and Middlebrooks are perfectly reasonable Nos. 5 and 6 hitters at this stage, but penciling either into the cleanup spot makes you want to lunge for the eraser.

Ortiz has a rather fascinating list of career comps -- Juan Gonzalez, Lance Berkman, Jason Giambi, Albert Belle, Carlos Delgado -- and there is certainly nothing approaching their prime-of-career ilk on the roster at the moment to fill the void. As much as Red Sox fans have fallen for Jackie Bradley Jr. -- and it was inevitable -- it would be foolish to punt away a year of service time in order to keep him on the Opening Day roster, even with Ortiz's injury.

The best path during Papi's absence? Rotate the likes of Napoli, Jonny Gomes and Jarrod Saltalamacchia at designated hitter while hoping one of the Replacement-Level Three -- Carp, Daniel Nava, and Lyle Overbay -- somehow begins the season on a hot streak. The most useful of the three may be the defensively proficient Overbay (.776 career OPS in April), though to be honest, I'd almost rather have his top career comp, 52-year-old Alvin Davis.

The Red Sox need Ortiz, which is why they need to be patient -- losing him for, oh, even a month beyond Opening Day is a far more palatable option then watching him limp away at midseason again.

I have to admit, it's a bit disconcerting, even disappointing, to hear such quick dismissals of him, not just because of all that he's done, but because of what he still may be capable of doing.

David Ortiz deserves a good ending to his time with the Red Sox. Let's hope it's not already in motion.

During this week's podcast with Steve Silva and ringmaster Adam 12, we discuss David Ortiz's injury, Manny Ramirez's new baseball home, and praise Jackie Bradley Jr. so much that I'm actually the cautious one, which never happens. Listen up here:

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

In what he will confirm Saturday as his final season, I hope Mariano Rivera, the career saves leader with 608, punctuates his impossibly accomplished and dignified career by claiming the single-season record as his own.

Sixty-three saves might seem out of reach for a 43-year-old coming off major knee surgery, particularly since reaching that number might require saving every single one of the creaky and tattered Yankees' victories.

But if there's anything I've learned watching him since his who-the-heck-is-this-guy-and-how-does-he-get-the-baseball-to-do-that? introduction in the 1995 American League Divisional Series, it's that doubting Rivera is particularly fruitless endeavor. If only they'd traded him for Felix Fermin when they had the chance.

I think I began suggesting Rivera might slip sometime around 2005. I think I gave up about four years ago, and if there are signs of aging, good luck finding them in the numbers -- his ERA has been 1.94 or lower in eight of the past 10 seasons, and his career adjusted ERA of 206 remains the best among any pitcher ever, with Pedro Martinez a distant second at 154.

He won't be a unanimous Hall of Famer because of a goofy tradition of never allowing it to happen and a stigma against closers, but I can't think of many more deserving to be the first. (Greg Maddux would be one, maybe the one.)

If baseball's current oldest active player didn't have such uncommonly good-nature and grace, you'd think he was a cyborg created in a Steinbrenner-funded lab, designed to effortlessly throw the perfect cutter to the perfect spot, every single time.

His legacy is enhanced even beyond Hall of Fame lock status by the five championships in New York and his extraordinary talent/knack for being at his best in the biggest moments -- his postseason ERA is 0.70 compared to 2.21 in the regular season.

The nature of the job and Rivera's mien of invincibility mean his high-profile failures, inevitable for even the greatest closers, will linger, and he has had a few memorable ones: The Luis Gonzalez bloop in '01, Bill Mueller in '04 and Bill Mueller in '04 again and ... well, there haven't been many more, the saves under any circumstances usually piling up like shattered Louisville Sluggers.

The Red Sox have actually had relative success against Rivera – in 109 games versus Boston, he has 54 saves, a 2.80 ERA, and a 1.22 WHIP in 119 innings. There were times when he was invincible – they couldn't touch him in three innings during Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS, and they may not have scored in 300 innings against him.

But more than any win or loss against him, he will most be remembered for that good-humored, pitch-perfect response when he received a mock cheer from Fenway fans during the ring ceremony on Opening Day 2005. Rivera smiled, waved his hat, laughed genuinely, seeming to truly appreciate the moment.

I believe it was on that day that he became the most respected opponent in Red Sox history, classy in his many victories and even classier while being reminded of a defeat.

It's unlikely that the Red Sox and Yankees will add another postseason chapter to their storied history this season, and so it appears Rivera's final game at Fenway, presuming he pitches, would be September 15.

For any other opponent who had defeated the Red Sox so many times over the years, the temptation might be to send him off into retirement with a collective "good riddance."

But this is no ordinary opponent. This is Mariano Rivera, most respected opponent, and there's only one way to say goodbye. The final Fenway salute to him simply must be as genuine and perfect as his salute to you on that sunny day in April 2005.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Playing nine innings while hoping reports of a haircut didn't affect Andrew Miller's unintentional Expos-era Bill Lee homage ...

The best compliment I have ever received in this business, absolutely the best, and I don't even know what would be second, came from Bob Ryan.

He might not remember it, but what with him being a huge reason I'm in this business and that my respect for him only grew after I became fortunate enough to work with him, well, I'll never forget. We were in our hotel bar in Vancouver during the 2010 Winter Olympics, having a few post-gold-medal hockey game beverages with a couple of other stray sports writers.

Bob of course knows everybody and everybody of course knows Bob and only a small subset of obsessed East Coast baseball fans knows me, and so as he was introducing me to a writer from a California paper, he said, "Chad writes really smart, funny stuff about baseball. He keeps me on my toes. HE KEEPS ME ON MY TOES!''

Let's just say no other professional validation has really been necessary since.

I bring this up because -- well, dammit, my massive ego likes telling the story. But there's a more relevant and timely reason. You may have read Bob's column last weekend, the one in which he railed against Wins Above Replacement as a judgment rather than an actual statistic of which "intelligent people have signed off on this utterly bogus piece of baseball idiocy."

The piece whacked the hornet's nest of animosity between old-school writers and those immersed in sabermetrics, spurring the usual exasperated and snarky rebuttals that occur whenever one side aggravates the other. I'm not sure how much grief Bob got for the piece, but there was some, and it would be patently unfair to mention him in the same breath as an ancient in-my-day troll like Murray Chass. When it comes to advanced metrics, he really does try to stay on his toes, which I think should give him plenty of leeway even if he does loathe a particular useful statistic. Plus, he votes for Tim Raines for the Hall of Fame, which is worth a couple more bonus points, I say.

Bob's chief complaint about WAR, whether we're talking the Fangraphs or Baseball-reference versions, or Baseball Prospectus's WARP, is that the baseline for what constitutes a replacement-level player is vague. Which is true. But that doesn't invalidate the statistic by any means. Even if the baseline for what constitutes a replacement-level player is confusing, the data used to compare player vs. player against that baseline wherever it happens to be set is telling and valuable.

WAR, in its various incarnations, attempts to summarize a player's entire contribution to his team with one statistic that tells you how much more valuable he is to that team than the proverbial replacement-level player. No one that I know of claims it is the perfect stat. But it is one more useful tool to help a fan view the game through another prism, to provide another metric for thorough player evaluation, and to offer further perspective on a player's greatness.

If you saw Pedro Martinez pitch during his 1998-2001 peak in Boston, or if you just glance at all the black ink on his baseball-reference.com page, you know he's truly an all-time great. But it's always fun to explore a player's place in the game further, and WAR helps provide even more context and information

For instance, Pedro's 11.4 rWAR in 2000 is 35th-best all-time among pitchers -- but fourth-best since 1920, behind only '85 Dwight Gooden (24th, 11.9), '72 Steve Carlton (27th, 11.7), '97 Roger Clemens (tied for 28th, 11.6), and '71 Wilbur Wood (tied for 32d, 11.5).

I mean, how about that? Perhaps we were unaware that Wilbur Wood, who had a 1.91 ERA in 334 innings in '71, was so brilliant that particular season? I was. And appreciate that WAR showed me something I didn't know -- yes, that it kept me on my toes with the reminder.

2. Whether you favor a particular advanced metric (I personally favor OPS+, even though it isn't perfect because it's an easily explained, accessible way to compare players across generations who played under various factors) or are a frightened curmudgeon who refuses to acknowledge any of them at all, there simply is no denying that your team isn't doing its due diligence if it isn't gathering as much information -- through scouting, sabermetrics, and any other measure that may provide an advantage-- as possible.

It's often said that the 2004 Red Sox won because of chemistry, and there's no doubt in my mind that a loose, devil-may-care band of players was required to overcome the franchise's history, not to mention a 3-0 hole to the Yankees. But advanced metrics also played an enormous role in putting that roster together, whether we're talking about discovering the underappreciated value of David Ortiz, Kevin Millar, Bill Mueller or Mark Bellhorn.

Perhaps Theo Epstein's greatest strength as a general manager is collecting information from all sides -- the baseball ops people like Ben Cherington, a wizened former GM like Bill Lajoie, and the various sabermetrics wizards -- and using the knowledge gained to make an extremely informed decision. If you still want to think it's all about chemistry, I suggest reading Baseball Prospectus's "Mind Game'' on how the Sox really succeeded.

3. If you require a name to actualize the concept of a replacement-level player, or readily available talent, I offer you 2012 Scott Podsednik, who in the span of three months last season was purchased by the Red Sox from the Phillies, traded to Arizona in the Craig Breslow deal, released by the D-Backs two days later, and re-signed by the Red Sox. Now that's readily available. Not sure about the talent part, however.

4. Actually, I'm only being slightly facetious when I suggest that the entire daily Red Sox lineup, post-Dodgers blockbuster, was pretty much replacement-level every day. During the final two games of the season -- or as I prefer to recall them, the final two games of Bobby Valentine's managerial career -- the Red Sox' No. 3 hitter was Daniel Nava.

5. I recognize that advanced metrics can be intimidating. Sometimes I'll read something by Dave Cameron or Jonah Keri or Ben Lindbergh or one of the many other sabermetrically savvy writers out there who make up the new mainstream and I'll wind up both impressed with the particular piece and frustrated that it's out of my personal range.

Sam Miller's recent thoughtful take on WAR for ESPN the Magazine was one such piece. But in striving to understand as much as my wee brain will allow, there are some resources I've leaned heavily on when trying to grasp, utilize or explain certain advanced metrics. The SABR glossary and Fangraphs library are both detailed and yet accessible, and I've relied on Alex Remington's explanations of specific stats on "Big League Stew'' so often that my bookmarks of them have figuratively become dog-eared.

Sabermetrics can be intimidating, but if you have the patience and the will to learn what the data is trying to tell you, it can be another illuminating, even rewarding, way to look at baseball.

6. Sincerest best wishes to Ryan Westmoreland, the former No. 1 prospect in the Red Sox organization and admired son of Rhode Island who announced his retirement from baseball Wednesday at 22.

Westmoreland, touted by Baseball America in 2010 as a "potential 30-30 player who could one day bat third in the Red Sox lineup,'' underwent surgery in March 2010 to remove a cavernous malformation from his brain stem. After making encouraging progress in an attempted comeback, he suffered a setback last July that required a second surgery.

It's impossible not to wonder what might have been -- he was ranked ahead of Josh Reddick (3), Anthony Rizzo (8), and Will Middlebrooks (19) among Red Sox prospects three years ago -- but given his grace, bravery and determination in the face of incredible adversity, it's easy to have faith that Westmoreland has many extraordinary accomplishments ahead.

7. Jose Iglesias is off to a nice start this spring -- 6 of 20 with four extra-base hits -- and its certainly encouraging. You want to see a player with his dazzling defensive skills make it, and perhaps he is figuring it out at the plate enough to be relevant to this year's Red Sox. Ideally, he'd keep hitting throughout the spring, go down to Pawtucket and put up an OPS a hundred-and-fifty or so points higher than the .589 he has in 783 Triple A plate appearances so far, and be ready to help should injury affect Stephen Drew at some point.

8. Another Red Sox prospect approaching a crossroads, 25-year-old Ryan Lavarnway, is off to a slower start this spring, hitting .143 with a .414 OPS in a puny 15 plate-appearance sample size. All it takes is a nice 3 for 4 day for his numbers to look much better, but it also must be noted that they are currently right in line with his Marc Sullivan-like .157/.211/.248 performance in 166 plate appearances last year. With circumstantial evidence currently suggesting that David Ortiz will play far fewer than 162 games this season, Lavarnway could be in line for significant time at designated hitter. But first, you know, he probably ought to prove he can hit.

9. As for today's Complete Random Baseball Card:

In case you were wondering, Battle's career WAR was 0.2. Get it? Battle ... WAR? You were wondering, right? OK, I'll leave now.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

My short answer: Nope, though I understand where Nick Cafardo was coming from in his Sunday piece. The Red Sox do have a lack of star power by their usual standards in the heart of their order, and the best of Josh Hamilton would be fun to watch.

My long answer: Hamilton turns 32 in May, has played more than 133 games once in the past four years, hit .259 with an .833 OPS in the second half last season, struck out a career-high 162 times, missed three full seasons while battling substance abuse issues in the minors, and had a brief alcohol relapse just last February. He's a wonderful talent and seems to have his life together, but after the Dodgers rescued the Red Sox from the Carl Crawford contract, I don't think it would be good karma or business to turn around and commit five years and $125 million to a player with as much baggage as Hamilton has.

We discussed Nick's column and much more on this week's RadioBDC Red Sox segment with host Adam 12 and Steve Silva. Check it out if you will.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

More than just a ray of hope on the other side of the bridge, Jackie Bradley has emerged as perhaps the fun story from Red Sox camp. The 22-year-old outfielder, extraordinarily talented, bright of mind and disposition, downright impossible not to like, has been this spring's reminder that the future is not too far away from becoming the present.

I'm not saying he should break camp with the team. Oh, from the standpoint of wanting to watch an interesting, enjoyable team, I do wish he would. Having seen him more than a few times in Portland last summer, I can say without hesitation that he is the best outfield glove in the organization, and if John Farrell were free to play the best defensive center fielder in center field without politics, accomplishment, and status as factors (not to mention constant reminders of the Mike Cameron debacle), Bradley would be in center at Yankee Stadium on April 1 and Jacoby Ellsbury would be to his immediate right, covering that huge left field.

That's just a spring daydream, of course, rather than something that has a real chance of happening. Bradley would accrue a full year of service time with 172 days on the major league roster this season, meaning his arbitration clock and, eventually, free agency would start a season sooner than normal. The most prudent thing to do is to send him to Pawtucket, at least for a couple of weeks, to make sure his service time doesn't exceed those 172 days this season and he can hit free agency after 2019 rather than '18. It's no fun from an instant-gratification perspective, but it's good business and a common practice. The Rays may even do the same with Wil Myers, whom they actually need.

Now, if it were just a baseball matter, I have no doubt Bradley would make this team. And as tempting as it must be to keep around a talented kid who will help defensively and on the bases even if he isn't quite ready to deal with big-league breaking stuff, I have become convinced this spring that Ben Cherington and the baseball ops staff recognized Bradley's skill set -- that spectacular defense, a quick bat, superb plate discipline, the makeup and maturity to handle whatever challenges come his way -- would expedite his Major League ETA beyond even the most optimistic projections.

I think the Red Sox have planned for Bradley's rapid emergence, even expected it, which is why they have not brought in a lefthanded-hitting left fielder whose ceiling exceeds replacement level. Mike Carp, Daniel Nava, and Ryan Sweeney are place-holders, and they will not be holding the place for long.

I've mentioned this before, but it bears repeating with a little more depth: Bradley is on a very similar career path to the one Ellsbury took during 2006-07. The symmetry of how perfectly Bradley is lined up to be Ellsbury's successor (yes, I'm presuming he leaves to join the Dodgers as perennially injured Carl Crawford's replacement) is rather striking when you consider all that they have in common.

Bradley was the 40th pick in the 2011 draft after an outstanding career at South Carolina. (He was the MVP of the College World Series as a sophomore for the champs before slumping as a junior because of injuries.) In 2012, at age 22, he reached Double A, putting up a .271/.373/.437 slash line in 271 plate appearances. After the season, he was ranked the No. 31 prospect in the minors by Baseball America.

Ellsbury was the 23d pick in the 2005 draft after an outstanding career at Oregon State. In 2006, at age 22, he reached Double A, putting up a .308/.387/.434 slash line in 225 plate appearances. After the season, he was ranked the No. 33 prospect in the minors by Baseball America.

We know how spectacularly it all played out for Ellsbury the following season. He returned to Portland, hit .452 in 83 plate appearances, climbed another rung to Pawtucket (.740 OPS in 87 games), arrived for his big-league debut June 30, and after a couple of trips up and down I-95, ended up hitting .353 in 33 regular-season games, seizing the center field job from Coco Crisp in the postseason, and starring in the World Series during the Red Sox' second championship in four seasons.

Will Bradley's 2013 season be a similar whirlwind? Well, I think we can presume that World Series part probably isn't happening. But presuming he comes out swinging after his inevitable demotion this spring, his debut should come sooner than late June. Between two levels last year, he hit .315 with a .430 on-base percentage, 24 steals, and 87 walks, a reasonable approximation of the outstanding No. 2 hitter he should become.

He is not be ready to be that offensive player at the major-league level just yet. But he can help the Red Sox the day he arrives with his defense and his patience.

For now, those of us anticipating Bradley's arrival could probably use a little of the latter ourselves. Avoiding that service time now means we might get to watch him a little bit longer. But let's not be too patient. The Red Sox make their second trip to the Bronx on May 31, and you know, that outfield is rather huge.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Now that I've baited you with the headline, let me weasel into instant cop-out mode. I'm not ready to proclaim that the Red Sox will be looking down upon the Yankees in the American League East standings once the autumn rolls around.

It's tempting because the Red Sox, with a sneaky-deep roster and the reasonable expectation that some long-proven veterans will bounce back from their 2012 injuries and struggles, are going to be much better than conventional wisdom suggests.

At the moment, I feel like "much better" means they top out at 87 wins while playing meaningful ballgames deep into September and, with some good fortune that is a couple of years overdue, perhaps into October. At the least, they'll be decent and likable, a worthwhile and pleasant summer pastime again.

But the Yankees, who won the division, 26 games ahead of the last-place Red Sox, still have a lot going for them, at least on paper and based on past performance. Just not as much as usual.

And there's the potential -- the very real potential -- for so much more to go wrong.

Actually, spring training is still in its early days, and much already has gone wrong in Tampa. Phil Hughes, who is being depended upon to finally live up to his potential in the rotation, is having back problems. Curtis Granderson, whose 84 homers the past two seasons are 10 more than anyone else in baseball, is out 10 weeks with a broken forearm. And Kevin Youkilis, the diminished former Sox star who was signed to replace the disgraced husk of Alex Rodriguez, suffered an oblique strain just this morning. It's barely just begun and already the problems are mounting.

The Yankees have more star power than the Red Sox -- start with sensational if occasionally maddening second baseman Robinson Cano and ace lefty CC Sabathia. But some of those other big names no longer have exclamation points at the end of their names, but question marks.

Mariano Rivera is a wonder of the world, but he's coming off a knee injury that cost him almost all of last season, and he's the last active player born in the '60s. He's nine days younger than me, for pete's sake, and I'm in tatters. He seems ageless, but trust me, he will feel it one of these years.

Derek Jeter is 39 years old, and while his 2012 season was historically brilliant for a shortstop of that age, he's returning from a broken ankle that could cost him a step or two he can't afford to lose. The only shortstops in history to produce in their late 30s and early 40s at the level Jeter did last year are Luke Appling and Honus Wagner, a couple of ancient legends who, if I'm not mistaken, both faced Rivera on a barnstorming tour.

Mark Teixeira isn't recovering from an injury like Jeter and Rivera, and he's relatively young by Yankees standards (he turns 33 in April), but since his terrific first season in New York when he led the AL in homers (39), RBIs (122), and total bases (344) in 2009, he's consistently trended downward, with his on-base percentage, slugging percentages and OPS declining in each of the last three seasons. Don't tell Mazz, but it's starting to look like a blessing that he shunned the Sox in the winter of 2008-09.

Perhaps their stars will be rejuvenated and healthy and will carry the Yankees to another postseason berth. It's reasonable, especially in a division that features five differently structured, fascinating teams that all can stake a claim to being a postseason contender. But they'd better hope that happens, because they're not getting there any other way.

As Jonah Keri noted in a terrific State of the Yankees address on Grantland Monday, it's rather amazing how little depth is on this roster. Nick Swisher took his useful bat and look-at-me mannerisms to the bright lights of Cleveland, leaving an outfield of ancient Ichiro Suzuki, Brett Gardner, who missed most of last season with an elbow injury, and ... Matt Diaz?

Russell Martin departed for Pittsburgh, leaving some uninspiring combination of Austin Romine, Chris Stewart, and Francisco Cervelli behind the plate. Rafael Soriano took his 42 saves to Washington, replaced by hard-throwing, underachieving tease David Aardsma. They're hoping to catch lightning in a bottle with perennially damaged Travis Hafner. It's a wonder they didn't sign Grady Sizemore too.

There is undeniably a makeshift element to much of the Yankees' roster, and with little help on the immediate horizon (slider specialist Mike Montgomery is their only young player who may make an immediate impact), if the injuries continue to mount and the older core starts to look like they belong standing next to Yogi at Old Timers' Day, the floor could fall from under them in a hurry.

It's hard to imagine that the Yankees could crumble in the calamitous manner the Red Sox did last year -- Bobby Valentine isn't their manager, for starters, and they're unlikely to match the 1,587 man-games lost to injury that the Sox did a season ago (according to Baseball Prospectus).

But if certain things that could go wrong do go wrong -- Jeter and Rivera aren't the men they used to be, Teixeira continues his odd regression into the modern version of early '90s Kent Hrbek, and the lack of depth catches up to them -- they could find themselves surpassed by the Red Sox, who are unheralded but deep and have the promising likes of Jackie Bradley Jr. just a short bridge away.

Are the Red Sox better than the Yankees? I'm not ready to say so. Not yet. But it's very close, and this much is certain: With the way the rosters are currently constructed, it's the Yankees, and not the Red Sox, who have put themselves in a position in which a lot could go wrong, with virtually none of it endurable.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Realized the other day that it's been about three years since I last pulled together a mailbag. Not sure why I got away from it -- they're always fun to do, and I'm inexcusably awful at staying on top of email these days, so I figure this is a good way to catch up on some of it. Other questions arrived via Twitter as well as outtakes from the Friday chat. We'll do another one before 2016, I promise. In the meantime, let's get to it, and keep the questions coming ...

Beyond the fact that it is creepy do you have a problem with sportswriters jumping all over themselves to document the increase in body mass of Bryce Harper and Mike Trout? I get that it is a "story" in the sense that these are two of the biggest stars in baseball, but at the same time if these writers were reading stories written in this manner that were published back in 1998 there would be a chorus of "we should have known betters". Are "BEST SHAPE OF THEIR CAREER" stories really that enticing? Or just that easy? -- Neil (DC)

"Best shape of their career" is of course one of the great recurring cliches of spring training, at least unless you're talking about Felix Doubront, aka Southpaw Guapo. The guys at "Hardball Talk'' especially have a great bit of fun with that particular spring-training narrative, and it's understandable, but in the case of Trout in particular, it's actually a worthwhile storyline. He came in at 241 pounds, which is huge given that he's a rangy center fielder and one of the most electric and efficient basestealers we've ever seen. For someone coming off a historically brilliant rookie season, it's a bit jarring to see him make such a drastic change to his physique. His first year was so incredible that it's a reasonable to ask whether he will ever have a better one. If he slips a bit this year -- and as Baseball Prospectus's Ben Lindbergh writes today, it's reasonable to expect that he will -- there will be questions about his offseason workout regimen, whether that's fair or not.

Chad, the likelihood of all the things you say in your Unconventional Preview column today that need to happen for the Red Sox to be a winning team actually happening is remote. Like winning the lottery remote.
-- Your Name

Sure. But I don't think all of those things -- everyone staying healthy, the Victorino/Napoli/Drew newbies bouncing back, Buchholz and Lester thriving -- will happen. But I think it's reasonable to expect that, oh, half of it does. And if Lester finds his old form but Buchholz can't stay healthy, Victorino hits like he did in '11 while Napoli needs a walker by midseason, Ellsbury is an MVP candidate while Papi gets hurt, that sort of split -- they still have a chance to be pretty good.Everything went wrong last year. They won 18 of their final 60 games. They lacked more than talent. They lacked competence. They will be much better in both regards this season.

Hope you're right with your prediction of 87 wins [for the Red Sox]. Maybe it's the pre-2004 in me popping up, but I'm not so optimistic. I'm old and old-school when it comes to baseball, and a shortstop who can save 50 runs a year really appeals to me. I should not judge Stephen by J.D., but I drew my conclusions by watching the former No. 7 and having him on a few Rotisserie teams. Except for the grand slam [in the 2007 ALCS against the Indians], of course, almost as big a hit as David Ortiz's homer in the first inning of Game 7 vs. the Yankees.
-- Peter S.

If Iglesias saves 50 runs over the course of a season, he will be the greatest defensive shortstop in the history of baseball, bar none. Brendan Ryan -- a decent comp for what Iglesias might ultimately become -- led the majors in Defensive Runs Saved by a shortstop last year ... with 27. Iglesias's sensational defense simply will not compensate for his wet noodle bat at this point. Give Drew a chance. If his ankle is right, he'll be capable at shortstop and an asset in the lineup.

I agree with your feelings on a trade involving either Paul Pierce or Kevin Garnett for guys with questionable attitudes. It's just incredibly frustrating as a Celtics fan to see this team continue to fail to get a decent true center. Garnett doesn't count. He's told you he's really a 4; and at age 36 I think he might collapse from exhaustion banging around at the 5, basically by himself. I like Danny Ainge, but am I crazy to say he has completely failed in this regard? The best center we've had since Perk has been a 39-year-old Shaq. Is it really that hard?
-- Bob P.

You know ... it kind of is that hard. The results haven't been great, but given how challenging it is to fill in a roster already dotted with highly-compensated stars, I have no problem with the process. Trying to wring a little more high-quality play out of Shaq, Rasheed Wallace, and even Jermaine O'Neal as complementary players to the Garnett-Pierce-Allen-Rondo core made a lot of sense. It was something Red would have done, and did, with players like Pete Maravich, Bill Walton, Scott Wedman, or the Lakers with a guy like Bob McAdoo. It just didn't happen to work, but because it's so difficult to find a decent big man -- I mean, Michael Olowakandi was a No. 1 overall pick, Todd Fuller went ahead of Kobe Bryant, and on and on -- that it seems the best way to go is to take that risk on a player who actually has accomplished some things.

No longer sold that Jose Iglesias is the shorttop of the future. He is more likely the next Rey Ordonez. I say let Drew man the job until Xander Bogaerts is ready, because he is the SS of the future. Or until they convert Will Middlebrooks to 1B and Bogaerts to 3B, when Deven Marerro is ready at SS. Either way, Iglesias is not the answer. If he can't hit AAA pitching after 2 years, he's a lost cause.
-- Peter G.

I don't know that he's a lost cause. While comparing him to Ozzie Smith or Alan Trammell at the same age, as his defenders have done, simply does not work (Ozzie was in the majors after one minor league season, and Trammell hit .300 at age 22 in his third full season). And anyone who thinks being the next Rey Ordonez is a compliment was familiar with him only from Web Gems. He had a .600 OPS in the majors -- miserable, and yet better than Iglesias's in Triple A after two years. I suppose there's a glimmer of hope in the Omar Vizquel comps -- he had just a .598 OPS in Triple A. But the hunch here is he gets passed by Bogaerts, and with Deven Marrero getting a chance to advance quickly, it's now or never for Iglesias with the Red Sox.

Given the media's recent (last two seasons) predictions of grandeur, why exactly should The Nation listen now that they predict A Bridge To Nowhere?
-- BigONo

Depends who you're listening to in the media. Lot of reasonable voices out there who explain their thinking -- PeteAbe, Gordon Edes, Alex Speier, and many others. I try to be among them. The "Best Team Ever'' stuff is the work of headline writers trying to get you to buy the paper. Be discerning in who you read and who you believe. Also, read and believe me, always.

I enjoy your coverage of the radio wars. While I listen to both stations the question I have is why is Jason Wolfe not taking a huge hit for WEEI?s troubles? A lot of this is on him and his decisions.
-- Howard F.

Been getting this question a lot lately, for obvious reasons. Jason played a huge role in WEEI's success, and also contributed to the institutional arrogance that put them into their current position. But I think he is taking a huge hit -- he had to fire Glenn Ordway, someone with whom he had a long, successful, lucrative run, and presumably someone who is a good friend. That couldn't have been easy, and it won't be his last difficult task. If he does survive this, and I actually believe he should, some of the burden should be off him. These recent decisions are on Jeff Brown, Entercom Boston's VP market manager and Jason's boss, and if they don't work beyond saving a few bucks, he deserves as much heat as Jason is receiving.

When I look back on Celts after 1st Big 3, I see Len Bias, Reggie Lewis and a bum lottery ping-pong ball. Can't the Celts hope for better draft luck next time around?
-- Duncan

It's certainly overdue -- perhaps sending someone other than M.L. Carr and his lousy just-tanked-for-this-chance karma would be a better idea this time. (Who was the lottery rep in the Greg Oden/Kevin Durant year? It was Wyc, right?) Sheesh, the first time around they weren't even lucky enough to get Keith Van-Bleepin' Horn. But the history of the post-Big Three Celtics is often retold without enough of an emphasis on Reggie Lewis's death. Len Bias was incredible, but given how many players in that '86 draft washed out because of drugs, who's to say that wouldn't have been his fate had he survived past the night after the draft? Reggie, though ... we already knew what we had and what he could be. It didn't go straight from Larry Bird to Dominique Wilkins, you know? Also: Ainge would have totally taken Durant.

Gun to your head, which game 7 are you taking back; Lakers in 2010 or Miami last year? Banner 18 or the chance to say you beat the team nobody said you could beat and that pill LeBron doesnt have a ring. I think I'm taking Miami. Thoughts?
-- Jake

Lakers. No doubt. None. If Perk had been healthy ... if Doc had given Nate Robinson a few extra minutes ... If Artest's cheap-shot on Ray Allen earlier in the series hadn't mess up his quad ... If Sheed didn't run out of gas ... If Artest's heave doesn't drop ...If KG didn't get out-rebounded by 15 by Pau Gasol, and yes, I feel horrible for bringing it up ... those are the ifs you've got to live with. LeBron? I have the utmost respect for the way he plays the game. Game 6 was the pivotal performance of his career, and in retrospect, it's starting to feel inevitable. Plus, that Celtics team overachieved.

RANDOM LaSCHELLE TARVER INTERLUDE

END OF RANDOM LaSCHELLE TARVER INTERLUDE

Are you still convinced the Sox are going to trade Andrew Bailey? I never understood your logic. He was hurt most of last year, and had 7.04 ERA. Talk about selling low.
-- Todd

Not so much, in part because there will probably be attrition, and also because I haven't heard a peep about him wanting to close elsewhere. (Doesn't hurt that Bruce Rondon is hitting 100 miles per hour in Tigers camp, either.) But it still wouldn't completely surprise me -- there were rumors he was headed to Toronto as compensation for John Farrell before it ended up being Mike Aviles.

The Aaron Hernandez deal seemed smart at the time. It was the exact thing they didn't do with other guys (Vince Wilfork, Logan Mankins) that eventually got them into trouble. Doing Rob Gronkowski deal early certainly seemed smart too.

But did they swing too much to the other guardrail with Hernandez? Especially after they already locked up Gronkowski? Should they have waited for it to play out with Hernandez?

If they didn't do Hernandez deal early, he would be going into the last year of his rookie deal this year, at chump change.

What they gave him is more total dollars than it would take to keep Welker at this point, and the $16 million guaranteed dollars Hernandez got is probably in spitting distance of the guaranteed dollars Welker would want at this point. Same for the $8 million a year Hernandez is getting.

Anyway if you had to have one guy next year, Welker or Hernandez who would it be? in my opinion, hands down, Welker.
-- Larry

Interesting take. Hernandez is so talented and versatile, but he's lost some luster because of his struggles to stay on the field and his inconsistency in big games. (Is that fair? I think that's fair.) But given the choice right now, I take Hernandez without a second thought. He's just 23, and his best days should be ahead. No matter where Welker signs or the amount he signs for, at 32, there's no denying he'll be getting paid for past performance rather than what he is likely to be. Welker should have a couple more highly productive seasons ahead. I hope the Pats keep him. But forced to make a choice between one or the other, there's not really a choice at all.

Ever wonder what your demographic is for the chat? Might be interesting to put that up as a question (ie, are you 18-34, 34-50, etc.) Might be risky for you though. :)
-- DMV

Tend to think my demo is roughly my age group or younger, extraordinarily handsome, and generally much smarter than me. I suspect there's pretty decent demographic appeal there than, say, what you'd find in the comments section of a Bleacher Report slideshow.

I can't be the only one who thinks that Big Papi plays in less than 81 games this year.
-- Jackie

Beginning to think the same way, Jackie. He's 37, admitted recently that there was a partial tear in the Achilles' has played one game since last July 16, and doesn't exactly look like he was addicted to cardio (for understandable reasons) this offseason. He was great when healthy last year, but it's hard to fathom right now that he has 150 games or so ahead of him this year.

Alfonso Soriano is available from Cubs with significant salary relief. His OPS '10-12 .816/.754/.815. Jonny Gomes in the same span: .749/.704/.853. Worth a shot?
-- Thom H.

Meh. He did hit 32 homers last year, but he's redundant with Gomes. Maybe if he hit lefthanded. Actually wonder if he ends up with the Yankees since Curtis Granderson is out for a couple of months. Brian Cashman has denied it, which sometimes foreshadows it actually happening. By the way, I refuse to believe Soriano is 37. I still think of him as the young fella in the Yankees lineup who couldn't hit Pedro's breaking ball even if he had one of those giant red plastic bats.

How do you see Jeff Demps fitting into the Patriots offense next year?
-- Eric M.

Honestly, no clue. He obviously has electric speed and should be what they desperately need in the kicking game, but he's coming off a redshirt season and needed to put on some weight after making the transition from Olympic sprinter. Seems like overall expectations are higher than they should be. He was productive at Florida, but let's not anoint him the second coming of Percy Harvin until he, you know, actually plays some football. What did he have, three catches last preseason?

Every time I see a writer take a shot at Bobby Valentine, I'm reminded of a quote from "Married with Children"--"If you give a gun to a chimp, and the chimp shoots someone, don't blame the chimp." Thanks for 2012, Larry Lucchino!
-- Studio 00

Obviously. What you should do is name the chimp athletic director. Standard procedure.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Don't know about you, but I've got a serious case of Ft. Myers envy going on right now. I know, during the 10 months of the calendar when it is not hosting the Red Sox in preparation for a new season, it's the kind of strip-malls-separated-by-stoplights zombie zone that reminds you of how lucky you are to live in New England. But when spring training is in session, there's no place I'd rather be, at least for a few weeks in February. Plus, Pedro's there, which makes everything brighter.

So with the Red Sox set to play their first official spring training game Saturday when they take on Wil Myers and the Rays at 1:35 p.m., I figured now is as a good a time as any to take an occasionally focused but mostly meandering look at what's ahead. Just for the sport of it -- and because the approach is fun for me generally got great feedback during football season -- I'm using the Unconventional Preview format I broke out every Friday morning during Patriots season for our abstract look at that Sunday's game. Who knows, maybe it will become a recurring feature during baseball season as well. Play ball ...

THREE PLAYERS I'LL BE WATCHING NOT NAMED TOM BRADY DAVID ORTIZ
Daniel Bard: I have a regular reader/correspondent who has been telling me since the middle of Bard's disastrous 2012 season that the righthander has thrown his last pitch in the majors, the implication being that the attempt to convert him to a starter turned him into a such a mechanical and mental mess that suggesting he had Steve Blass disease would be a kind diagnosis. I was beginning to think the reader was correct, especially late last season when Bard's velocity was down and his motion and delivery looked nothing like that of the guy who had been one of the most dominating setup men in baseball for a couple of seasons. So it was extraordinarily encouraging to read that he looked pretty sharp against Boston College Thursday. Disregard the opponent -- that he touched 94 miles per hour and threw strikes is just the news we wanted to hear, and were unsure we ever would again. Progress by any measure is good news when it comes to Bard this spring.

Jackie Bradley Jr.: All right, I'll say it: I think the reason the Red Sox haven't acquired a righty-mashing outfielder to platoon with Jonny Gomes (Mike Carp is better against lefties, albeit in a fairly small sample) is because they expect Bradley to arrive at Fenway this year.

Clayton Mortensen: By my accounting, the Red Sox have five bullpen locks (Joel Hanrahan, Junichi Tazawa, Koji Uehara, Craig Breslow and Andrew Miller), two quality relievers who could be traded (Andrew Bailey, Alfredo Aceves), a wild card (Daniel Bard), and a valuable swingman (Franklin Morales). That's a lot to sort out before even considering Mortensen, the 27-year-old speed-changing specialist. But make no mistake -- he should be considered. Mortensen was quietly effective in 26 appearances with the Sox last year, striking out 41 in 42 innings while allowing just 32 hits. He's out of options, and he probably belongs in that category with Bailey and Aceves, but here's hoping a guy proving to be a useful arm doesn't get away for nothing.

BOSTON 1988: ON THE ROAD, ON THE RADIO

A tip of the old-school Brewers cap to reader Tim H., who sent along this mesmerizing time-capsule of a video which features a 10-minute drive along the Central Artery in 1988 while a Red Sox-Brewers game plays on the radio. Being a Maine boy who was fortunate to make it down to Boston a couple of times a year as a kid, some of the changed and long-gone landmarks probably don't jump out as much to me as they might a Massachusetts lifer. (I started at the Globe in December '03, not long before the O'Neill Tunnel opened.) Any insight on what the car (and time) is passing by is much appreciated.

As for the game itself, well, listen for a bit -- the great Ken Coleman and young Joe Castiglione are on the call -- and it's easy to pin down the exact date. The pitching matchup is Roger Clemens vs. Teddy Higuera, a darned good pitcher for about six years before his career was abbreviated with arm troubles. (According to baseball-reference's measure, Higuera had more WAR than Clemens in '86.) Coleman tells us Jim Rice homered in the second inning. And there's a little bit of chatter about Mike Boddicker, suggesting that he'd just recently been acquired. (For a couple of kids named Brady Anderson and Curt Schilling, of course. What, they wouldn't take Todd Benzinger and Eric Hetzel instead?)

The game is this one: A 3-2 Red Sox victory on July 30 that fell right in the middle of Morgan Magic, a stretch in which the Sox 24 straight at home and 19 of 20 overall. Marty Barrett drove in Kevin Romine with the winning run with one out in the ninth. Clemens earned his 15th win. Rice's home run was his sixth of the season and 370th of his career. He'd hit just 12 more over the course of his career. Future Hall of Famers Paul Molitor and Robin Yount combined for two hits in the game -- or as many as Benzinger, who batted third for the Red Sox. Those were good days.

CONSIDER THIS THE ANNUAL REMINDER ...
... that there is no better Red Sox-centric blog than Surviving Grady, especially if you're the kind of slightly off-kilter chap who appreciates, say, the occasionally colorful humor of a smart-aleck headwarmer belonging to Brian Cashman or frighteningly realistic dialogue between Jacoby Ellbury and a certain "Elf." These guys are the best. I suspect you already know that, but if you don't, I'll accept the thank-yous later.

GIVE JOSE IGLESIAS A CHANCE? HEY, HOW ABOUT GIVING STEPHEN DREW A CHANCE? Last season, coming back from a gruesome ankle injury, Stephen Drew hit .223/.309/.348 with seven homers in 327 plate appearances. It was far and away the worst season of the soon-to-be 30-year-old shortstop's seven-year career. Yet his .657 OPS in the majors last season is nearly 70 points better than Jose Iglesias's OPS in two seasons in Triple A. I understand why some are anxious to anoint Iglesias the starter -- he might be the flashiest defensive shortstop in baseball. But he still hasn't proven he can hit in Triple A yet, and he must do so. It's often pointed out that Dustin Pedroia struggled when he first got to the majors, as if that's some proof that Iglesias would succeed with a prolonged chance. But Pedroia put up excellent offensive numbers in the minors (.307, .844 OPS), and the comparison is as about as valid as the suggestion that some players will learn to hit for power in the majors because, by golly, Don Mattingly did it nearly 30 years ago. Iglesias needs to learn to hit. He hasn't yet, and for all of those who suggest he could be Omar Vizquel, there's a better chance he ends up as Rey Ordonez or Mario Mendoza. Drew, who has had three seasons of at least 53 extra-base hits in the majors, is a fine hitter and an adequate shortstop, and it should be his job until Iglesias improves or Xander Bogaerts arrives to make us forget about both of 'em.

PREDICTION, BECAUSE IT'S ALWAYS WISE TO FORECAST A 162-GAME SEASON BEFORE THE FIRST PITCH OF THE GRAPEFRUIT LEAGUE
It's been fun watching certain fans and media become more familiar with the newcomers and realize that this is going to be a very likable team. Will it be a winning team? Well, you know what needs to happen .... Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz must be at their best ... Ryan Dempster and John Lackey need to deliver about 370 combined innings of league-average pitching ... David Ortiz needs to mash ... Jacoby Ellsbury needs to stay on the field ... Will Middlebrooks can't regress ... At least half of the newbies coming off down years need to bounce back (imagine if Shane Victorino and Mike Napoli find their '11 form) ... the bullpen needs to be as good as it looks on paper ... and so on. You know the necessary plot points. I'm putting the 2013 Red Sox down for 87 wins now and genuine contention in the American League East. Hey, it's spring, and even Ft. Myers looks appealing this time of year. If you can't be optimistic now, why bother?

Playing nine innings while presuming Jerry Trupiano is chattering about his All-Fish Team at this very moment ...

1. If you can ignore the fact that the Mariners, who scored nearly a third of a run less per game than the second-worst offense in the American League last season, essentially gave Mike Carp to the Red Sox for a half-eaten chicken parm Doug Mirabelli left behind, he's a mildly interesting pickup. He was plagued by injuries and pretty terrible last year, but two years ago he hit 12 homers with a .791 OPS in 313 plate-appearances. Suggestions that the 26-year-old could be a Brian Daubach-type are beyond wishful, but at the least he'll battle Daniel Nava for a roster spot (both are out of options) while allowing us to quit pretending that Lyle Overbay was the answer to anything other than the question, "Will the Red Sox ever sign a veteran first baseman more useless than J.T. Snow?"

2. Will Middlebrooks strikes me as someone who will become the quintessential No. 5 hitter, but I'm not sure he'll be up for the task of protecting David Ortiz (if such a thing is even necessary) this season. The 13/70 BB/K ratio as a rookie is somewhat concerning, and as much as I like his short, quick swing, I suspect he's going to be a .275-.280 hitter at his peak with 25 to 30 homers annually rather than the second coming of David Wright. Middlebrooks's projections this season are pretty interesting: ZIPS has him at .255 with a .726 OPS, 19 homers, and a 23/135 BB/K rate. PECOTA has him at .258 with a .748 OPS. Interesting take, by the way, by the excellent Marc Normandin at Over The Monster on how PECOTA views other Sox hitters.

3. I understand the sentiment that the Red Sox need to get versatile knucklehead Alfredo Aceves out of here for chemistry reasons. The 2004 Red Sox were the figurative Idiots. There have been too many literal idiots on the roster in the past couple of seasons, and we're all tired of it. But the more I think about it, the more I believe that this team is constructed well enough in terms of character and chemistry to be able to handle a goof like Aceves without it becoming a distraction. This year's team is structured so much better than the past couple of versions.

4. Sorry, this one lost me at the Red Sox' "already light" bullpen. It's not news that relief pitching is habitually volatile, but the Sox are stocked well enough with depth and versatility that they may be able to overcome even more than the usual attrition.

5. Prediction: Red Sox fans and various others who still pine for the shiny ornament by the name of Josh Hamilton will grow curiously silent as we get into the summer months. Coveting star power is certainly understandable, but Hamilton turns 32 in May, defines injury prone, struggled in the second half last year to the point that some scouts wondered if he'd devolved into a guess hitter, and has shed 20 pounds he probably didn't need to lose.

6. Stephen Drew was my pick for the Red Sox newcomer whose production most exceeds the collective expectations, and this tweet this morning did nothing to change my perception:

Stephen Drew moving as he did pre-'11 injury. In 2008-2010, his average season was .277, .800 OPS, 35 2bh, 12 3bh, 16 HR.

— Peter Gammons (@pgammo) February 20, 2013

Relatedly, can we cool it on Jose Iglesias until he masters Triple A? Please?

7. It was already easy enough to feel for Ryan Kalish, whose considerable promise has been blunted by injuries that have or will essentially cost him three seasons of his career. He's making Tim Naehring's abbreviated career look utterly fulfilling. But then I stumbled upon the Bill James Handbook's projections for Kalish entering the 2011 season, and I felt even worse. Perhaps their numbers -- which put him down for a .271 average, a .791 OPS, 20 home runs, and 43 stolen bases -- were rather optimistic considering no one in Red Sox history has had a 20/40 season (though Jacoby Ellsbury went 32/39 that season). Still, it's a clue to the talent Kalish had -- and hopefully still has, so many bad breaks later.

8. Red Sox fans are going to adore Jackie Bradley Jr., and not just because he is a spectacular defensive player with a knack for getting on base by any means necessary. The kid simply gets it, something my friends in Portland told me time and again last summer, and something I saw for myself recently at the Boston Baseball Writers Dinner. Bradley was the recipient of the Greg Montalbano Award, given annually to the individual who has made the greatest impact in the minor leagues that particular season. Rather than offering the usual thank-yous and brief platitudes, Bradley revealed that he had done some research on Montalbano, the former Northeastern lefty and Red Sox prospect who died of cancer at 31, so he could understand what winning the honor really meant. It was a heartwarming and classy gesture by a 22-year-old whose maturity well exceeds his years.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

Because sometimes, it really is random. Ah, who am I kidding? Jeff Stone is never random.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

The first item on the agenda today during this, our periodic gathering to discuss What's Best For the 2013 Red Sox (No Actual Grasp of Reality Required), is an obvious one after the events of Monday.

Remove Alfredo Aceves from the roster.

Replace him with Pedro Jaime Martinez.

Any objections? Didn't think so. Now on to our next order of business -- investigating the rumor that Felix Doubront is determined to become this decade's El Guapo. Discuss.

OK, even the most unabashed Pedro admirer -- hello there -- recognizes that he threw his last meaningful pitch in 2009, when he managed to go 5-1 with a 3.63 ERA for the National League champion Phillies, using his knowledge and savvy to overcome a repertoire that had regressed to the point that it resembled the stuff of a mere baseball mortal.

Man, I still miss that Pedro heyday at Fenway, when the Domincan flags would wave and electricity filled the air and every start was an event. I'm always wary of saying there will never be another like [fill-in the name of the great person], but I'm comfortable saying that the Pedro experience truly was a once-in-fan's-lifetime blessing.

I miss watching him pitch. I will always miss watching him pitch.

But damn, is it good to have him back in our baseball lives again.

There have been many words spent on Pedro's talent and charisma since he first became one of ours in the winter of 1997-98, but I've always found his intelligence equally fascinating. He commands his second language with such wit and nuance that his observations sometimes arrive cloaked in poetry.

"I'm just another fan in the parade,'' he said Monday when asked about the fans' warm reception of his official return to the organization as a special assistant to general manager Ben Cherington, "I'm happy they still feel for me.''

Another fan in the parade. It's a beautiful way to affirm his affection, renewed though it may be, for the franchise. But of course he is much more than that. Martinez's title may be vague and his role open-ended and perhaps not yet fully defined, but it took exactly one day of his presence at JetBlue Park to recognize two truths:

1) He's the biggest star the Red Sox could have brought into the fold over the winter, Josh Hamilton included. The man is beloved, as it should be, to the point that even Dennis and Callahan treated him with respect.

2) He is not Ted Williams, a gifted performer who grew frustrated during his managerial days trying to work with those who weren't blessed with his ability.

Pedro's knowledge of pitching -- and more important, his ability to communicate that knowledge -- is going to serve the Red Sox extremely well, I have no doubt.

I love that image at the top of the page, of Daniel Bard at rapt attention while Pedro seemingly elaborates on a mechanical subtlety, perhaps something that might have served as a solution to Bard's woes last year. I love that he's the voice of reason about Doubront, whose immaturity threatens to impinge upon his promise but who is a long way from a lost cause. I love that Rubby De La Rosa is a pet project who already knows the mysteries of Pedro's changeup.

I imagine my initial reaction toward Alfredo Aceves's knuckleheaded antics Sunday was similar to yours, or pretty much this: Get him gone. Ben Cherington has made a conscious effort, one I believe will reap benefits, to collect players known to be good teammates in the quest for an accountable, likable, professional ball club. Aceves's testing of his third manager in three seasons fits the profile of someone adept at insubordination. There's indifference, or perhaps something more inexcusable, to be found in that 6.47 second-half ERA of a season ago.

We now know why Brian Cashman barely shrugged when asked why the Yankees dismissed a pitcher who was 14-1 with a 3.23 ERA over parts of three seasons. At some point, his talent no longer justifies the antics. Sunday seemed to be that breaking point for the versatile and talented Aceves, so good in spurts during his two years with the Red Sox.

But now I wonder if he's a salvage case for Pedro. He always did love a challenge, and as someone who frustrated his managers from Jimy Williams to Terry Francona by flaunting certain rules (particularly involving timeliness), he might connect with Aceves on that rebellious level. I say give him one more chance.

If Pedro, who is smiling, beloved -- proof you can get away with a lot if you're brilliant enough -- can't get through to Aceves, then send him on his way. Because that's when we'd know he's truly hopeless.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Because they're a staple of this site, I get asked from time to time if I collect baseball cards. The standard answer is no, not really -- I was pretty obsessed from 1978 to '87 or so, but the reason I started using cards on this blog was simply for the art, back when I was fledgling on Blogger.com and couldn't fish through the Globe archives for what I needed.

But the more accurate answer is this: more than my wife knows.

I might pick up a pack at Target from time to time after completing my 6-year-old's search for the latest must-have Skylander. But mostly I like getting stuff that reaffirms my love for baseball, the inexpensive nostalgia that reminds me of the time when I first noticed the game. I bought a well-worn '73 Hank Aaron card that was unattainable when I was a kid and is pretty much worthless now, but nonetheless delivers a pleasant flashback.

Another recent time, I bought a cheapo '76 Cleveland Indians team set on eBay after having them in a what-if sports league, and yes, I do realize that is probably the dorkiest sentence ever written on Boston.com.

I also really dug the Topps Archives set last year, the mix of modern and legendary players and vintage card designs is pretty much what I would draw up if I were asked to design my ideal set. How much did I like it? Let's just say I bought more than the occasional pack at Target -- I need two cards to complete the set. Say, anyone have Adrian Gonzalez and Jemile Weeks?

Anyway, I haven't written a post on this project about the top 60 Topps cards of all-time since -- let's see -- May 2012, but while sorting through my Target and eBay contraband recently during the recent snowstorm, I had the urge to revive it. Here are cards 36-40.

Like collecting itself, I suppose, the countdown has been stagnant, but never entirely out of mind.

1976 Hank Aaron

Given that the all-time Home Run King (in conscience if not on paper) played his 23 big league seasons (1954-76) in the golden age of card collecting, it makes sense that there would be countless options for his inclusion in this project. And there were -- like peers Roberto Clemente and Willie Mays, he was featured on a memorable card almost every year. His 1954 rookie card rated second in Topps's voting. His 1956 card is a classic in my favorite all-time unattainable set. In '57, he unwittingly was made to hit lefthanded. In '73, he looked to the sky, as if he'd just found out about that 16-year old mistake (or, I suppose, was merely catching a popup off the bat off, oh, let's assume Pepe Mangual). I'm not entirely sure why I settled on this one, which is as gaudy as 1976 itself and features a puffier Aaron, who hammered 10 homers in his final season, though it may have something to do with appreciating a time when home run kings aged like the rest of us.

1977 Rod Carew

What is it with singles hitters and massive egos? Wade Boggs, Pete Rose ... well, I guess Tony Gwynn might be an exception. Carew, who hit .328 with 3,053 hits in his 19-year career, certainly did not lack for confidence, though he may have been short in the tact department. I remember watching a vintage "This Week in Baseball" on ESPN Classic a few years ago, maybe longer, back when the channel actually showed classic sports and wasn't just a promotional device for whatever was airing on the ESPN mothership that night. It was the episode from September 1978 that aired after the shooting death of Angels outfielder Lyman Bostock, who had played with Carew on the Twins the previous season and finished second behind him in the '77 American League batting race. Carew's comments were weirdly detached -- he basically said something like Bostock talked a lot and wanted to be great, like himself. It was about the most casual eulogy for a ballplayer gone too soon that you could imagine. But hey, Carew was right about himself -- he was great. I went into this exercise suspecting for some reason that he'd be overexposed as overrated. But he was not. He won six batting titles, lead the AL in on-base percentage four times, and that '77 season (.388, 239 hits, 68 extra-base hits, 100 RBIs, 69/55 K/BB ratio), the season from which this card showing him playing defense originates, was true brilliance. Carew could have left it unacknowledged, but you know, Lyman Bostock probably did want to hit just like him.

2010 Adrian Beltre

I'm coming around, all of you revisionist how-did-this-guy-get-away chirpers. I mean, I get the circumstances of the incredibly likable third baseman's one-and-done season with the Red Sox. He came here to rebuild his value after injuries and a bad marriage of skills-to-ballpark in Seattle, and did he ever do that. In his 154 games with the Red Sox, he played third base with such range and intense brilliance that it diminished our perception of his fine immediate predecessors. He led the league with 49 doubles, smashed 28 homers, and provided comic relief whether he meant to or not with his threats to maim amused teammates who dared touch his head. Oh, and he didn't just swing from the heels; he swung from one knee. This card manages to capture how fun it was to have Beltre here for a season, and given what we now know about management's desperate quest for star power, it must be asked: Did they not recognize what was right in front of them, or did a focus group tell them to just ignore it?

1980 Gary Carter

You got the sense watching Carter during his grand '80s heyday with the Expos and Mets that he couldn't contain that trademark gregariousness if he tried, not that such a thought ever crossed his mind. It's a challenge to find a picture from his baseball prime in which he isn't beaming, that smile camera-ready -- too ready, envious teammates sometimes whispered. I'll never believe there was phoniness there -- it seemed to me he was merely guy who could barely contain his love for the game and knew how lucky he was. But I also think it was apparent that there was another side to his personality that might have been underplayed, one evident by the look on his face on this lovely card. Gary Carter might have been a swell guy and an extraordinary player (the Carlton Fisk of the National League, in essence), but let's also remember that he was a ferocious competitor who thrived to the point of joy at one of the most grueling positions in sports. "The Kid" was the rarest kind, and perhaps that's one reason the death at age 57 of such a lively ballplayer and personality still isn't fully fathomable, a year later.

2012 Update 1987 Mini Mike Trout

I'm breaking all the rules! The rules, I'm breaking 'em all! OK, so I'm actually the one who set the rules for this little project (refresher here), but play along with me. This card of Angels outfielder Mike Trout, whose rookie season was so phenomenal that it's fair to wonder if we've already seen the best he has to offer, hardly fits the conventions of this project. It's a mini, for one thing, and I'm not even really sure what set it's from or how you'd go about obtaining it in a pack. All I know is that like the player himself, it's awesome in a lot of different ways -- the throwback Angels jersey, the fake-wood paneling design in homage to the gorgeous, worthless 1987 set, and the Future Stars designation, which always reminds me of Pat Dodson for some reason. I may need to get this one. Right after Gonzalez and Weeks.

Previously in this series:

Pack 1: 1952 Mickey Mantle, 1969 Nolan Ryan, 1978 Dave Winfield, 1956 Ted Williams, 1975 Oscar Gamble.

Pack 2: 1960 Carl Yastrzemski, 1952 Gus Zernial, 1956 Willie Mays, 1987 Barry Bonds, 1978 Reggie Jackson.

Pack 3: 1993 Pedro Martinez, 1957 Sandy Koufax, 1973 Vida Blue, 1968 Bob Gibson, 1985 Dwight Gooden.

Pack 4: 1978 Eddie Murray, 1985 Kirby Puckett, 1983 Wade Boggs, 1987 Mark McGwire, 1980 Rickey Henderson.

Pack 5: 1976 Robin Yount, 2001 Heritage Derek Jeter, 1982 Traded Cal Ripken Jr., 1962 Ernie Banks, 1979 Ozzie Smith.

Pack 6: 1973 Mike Schmidt, 1973 Dwight Evans, 1965 Joe Morgan, 1978 Paul Molitor, 1972 Carlton Fisk.

Pack 7: 1961 Frank Robinson, 1973 Johnny Bench, 1964 Pete Rose, 1987 Barry Larkin, 1968 Tom Seaver.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Pretty much since the black curtain fell on the eighth inning of Game 7 of the 2003 American League Championship Series, Dan Shaughnessy has referred to goat-horned manager Grady Little as "He Who Must Not Be Named,'' that Voldemort of Boston baseball.

But it didn't require rapt attention to David Ortiz's comments from his picnic table pulpit a couple of days ago to recognize that Little apparently now has ex-manager company in the Name-Doesn't-Ring-A-Bell club.

Ortiz's refusal to say "Bobby Valentine'' when discussing last year's manager was so obvious that it almost made one wonder whether his disgust for the one-and-done dugout disaster is so deep that he also refuses to say the name of Thursday's holiday for consistency's sake if nothing else.

"A lot of players had a lot of issues with our manager last year," said Ortiz when asked about the character of this year's team, hardly a leading question. He continued:

"A team is like a human body. If the head is right, the body is going to function right, but if the head is messed up, then the body is going to be all over the place. It seems like that was part of our situation last year. Guys weren't comfortable with the manager we had. Guys were struggling."

Ortiz's annoyance -- or perhaps a stronger word is required -- with Valentine is understandable. Ortiz is one of few Red Sox who at least publicly had Valentine's back, though the slugger's comments this week that he saw problems with the manager's approach as far back as last spring suggest his support may not have been unwavering or entirely genuine.

How did Valentine repay him for providing at least some form of support? He went on Bob Costas's talk show after he was fired and suggested Ortiz, who had been sidelined with an Achilles' injury since July 16, shut it down for good at the end of August after the franchise-altering blockbuster trade/salary dump with the Dodgers.

"He realized that this trade meant that we're not going to run this race, we're not going to finish the race properly and he decided not to play anymore," Valentine told Costas.

Whether Valentine believed it or not, it was a slimy thing to do, a salacious quote provided during an interview that after the fact feels like a job interview. (He'll soon debut a show on NBC Sports Radio.) Maybe Valentine needs a reminder of how hobbled Ortiz was when he made a one-game return Aug. 24, but for those of us who saw him that day, when every step looked like it could lead to disaster, there was no doubt that shutting him down was the right thing to do.

"I wasn't ready," Ortiz said. "I thought I was. I was doing some running. I knew I wasn't 100 percent but I thought I could survive. But it got worse. I got in a lot of pain and I actually put my career to the side, trying to come back, trying to help this ballclub. Doctors told me I could have snapped my Achilles running down to second base. You guys know the rest."

That Ortiz is still not 100 percent, nearly seven months to the day after initially suffering the injury, is only further confirmation of the obvious. Of course he's angry at Valentine. Who among us wouldn't be under the same circumstances?

But now that he's said his piece without saying the name, it's time for Ortiz to put this behind him. As fans who abandoned ship sometime last August and September are beginning to notice, the Red Sox have completely reversed their culture this year, bringing in accountable, affable professionals -- Ryan Dempster, Shane Victorino, Jonny Gomes, Mike Napoli and more. If Bobby V was nonsense, John Farrell is entirely no-nonsense.

This may not be a great team, though the opinion here is that there's a reasonable chance of a pleasant surprise ahead this summer and perhaps into the fall. It will almost certainly be a likable one, particularly compared to gag-inducing recent editions.

Ortiz, who was on a very short list of the best hitters in the American League when healthy last season (his 1.026 OPS was higher than that of respective qualified league-leaders Ryan Braun and Miguel Cabrera), is essential to the Sox' on-field success.

At 37, he remains the quintessential cleanup hitter, and while there were countless other circumstances that contributed to their collapse last year, it is relevant that they were 23-49 without him.

But his role in making sure the culture change takes effect as soon as possible is nearly as important as his role in the heart of the order.

He's beginning his 11th season with the Red Sox now, a gift from the Twins that gave beyond the wildest expectation, and has he ever seen it all. He's been a central character, the man of so many big moments, through the redemptive/rewarding "Idiot" years and the more conventional 2007 champs. He's been as exasperated as any of us through the down times of September 2011 and beyond. He's lived the full Red Sox experience.

But if he takes a moment to look around this spring, he'll notice that not only have many names changed, including that one he refuses to say, but that the atmosphere has as well. The group isn't the Idiots Redux, nor is it managed by one. It's a team with a chance, one enhanced if the familiar big fella in the middle is right, in both body and mind.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

This much can be said about John Lackey without debate: he doesn't make it easy on himself.

His default facial expression is something between a sneer and frown. He has the body language of an entitled teenager moping that his dad won't give him the keys to the BMW. He embarrasses teammates when they blunder behind him -- and sometimes when they fail to run down uncatchable rockets. He talks like a Simpsons character (which I suppose could also go in the "pros" category). He's been paid way too much money for one year of mediocrity, one year of the worst pitching performance Red Sox fans have ever been subjected too, and one year of rehabilitation.

And as I wrote Friday in my 10 predictions for spring training piece that surely you prioritized reading ahead of digging out of enough snow to bury Dustin Pedroia up to his neck, the stain on his reputation remains from the beer and chicken nonsense of September 2011.

His Red Sox tenure has been an utter mess so far, and three years after signing an $82.5 million contract, he has provided 26 wins, 23 losses, a 5.26 ERA, and a jarring sense that his signing will forever be mentioned with the Rockies' infamous cash-torching deals for Denny Neagle and Mike Hampton.

Yep, that's a lot to overcome. I'm not sure why any Red Sox fan would like him at this point, though the awareness of some of his personal struggles should gain him some sympathy as a human being rather than with the impersonality that we sometimes regard ballplayers.

I've just spent a lot of words reiterating what a bum he's been, further evidence that it's difficult to separate the annoying underachiever that he has been from the possibility of what he can be again.

But Lackey deserves the opportunity to overcome his lousy and/or lost three seasons with the Red Sox, and I think there's a reasonable chance that he does become a valuable, effective starting pitcher again.

First, it must be acknowledged of just how damaged he was the last time he threw a pitch of any meaning. Lackey wasn't hurt in 2011; he was injured, and he shouldn't have been out there. Theo Epstein said they tried to shut him down, but Lackey wanted the ball and there were no better alternatives (sorry, Kyle Weiland).

I'm not sure about that justification -- the Red Sox have had five pitchers in the past 50 years to throw more than 150 innings in a season with an adjusted ERA of 80 or lower: Lackey in '11, Al Nipper '86, the burning-out Dennis Eckersley in '83, and Jack Lamabe and Dave Morehead '64. Lackey was by most measures the worst among them, with opponents battering him for an .852 OPS. A replacement-level starter would have been a huge upgrade, though I suppose he wasn't as miserable as the Daisuke Matsuzaka/Aaron Cook tandem last year.

Lackey told the Globe his elbow bothered him for three years prior to his Tommy John surgery in December 2012, which lines up with the suspicion that he was damaged goods when he was signed three years earlier. It's hardly his fault that he took the jackpot the Red Sox offered. But at least now there's some hope that they get some value out of the deal, especially since they have a club option for somewhere in the $500,000 range in '15 because of a clause implemented in case he missed significant time with an elbow injury.

That they felt the need for such a clause probably should have been more a red flag than it was at the time. But now that his elbow is repaired -- he says he feels as good as he has in years -- and he's in such great shape that he almost looks lankier than John Henry, isn't it reasonable to expect that he can at least resemble the pitcher who was one of the AL's best from 2005-08?

I'm not suggesting he'll find his 2007 form, when he led the league in ERA (3.01), adjusted ERA (150), and finished third in the Cy Young balloting behind CC Sabathia and Josh Beckett. He was in his prime then, his age 28 season. He'll be 35 in October. His ace days are past, and no one of reasonable mind expects them to return.

But why can't he be a valuable middle-of-the-rotation starter, one who has had success in big moments (he won Game 7 of the 2002 World Series as a rookie and pitched a gem in Game 2 of the 2009 ALDS against the Red Sox). Lackey's velocity was consistent from 2007-2011, his average fastball in '11 (91.5 miles per hour) actually ranking as his second-fastest annually over that span (he averaged 91.6 in '09).

Nowadays, pitchers sometimes return from Tommy John surgery with a little extra kick on the 'ol heater -- in a weird way, the surgery can be a performance enhancer. Perhaps Lackey benefits from that. Certainly he benefits from being pain-free.

Listen, it's understood why Lackey is so unpopular. In many ways he earned that dubious distinction, and his 5.45 career ERA at Fenway suggests his pitching has rarely made a good impression. But we also remember him beating the Red Sox the last time they were in the playoffs. Now he has a real chance to be part of a revival that might just bring October baseball back to Fenway.

But the autumn is a long time away. The Red Sox are in Florida, awaiting spring and a season of fresh starts. John Lackey has worked hard for his. Give the guy a chance.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Yep, I know that headline is a lot to wrap your head around. Wakefield? Quarterbacks? Say what? If we wanted to watch quarterbacks throwing knuckleballs, wouldn't we just become Jets fans?

I know, too easy. But back to the concept here, which I think makes for a pretty cool concept one once you've got the details. Here they are:

The MLB Network will debut a new reality program titled "The Next Knuckler" on Feb. 13 at 9 p.m. Produced by MLB Productions, it features Wakefield, the respected knuckleballer who won 186 games in 17 seasons with the Red Sox, attempting to teach the mysterious pitch to five former quarterbacks, including Doug Flutie.

Contestants will face challenges to test the effectiveness of his knuckleball, and each episode, one will be eliminated from the competition based on performance and input from Wakefield and co-host and former teammate Kevin Millar.

The stakes are legit -- the winner will earn an invitation to Arizona Diamondbacks spring training camp and a chance to pitch in a spring game.

"I've dedicated my entire baseball life to the challenging art of throwing the knuckleball," says Wakefield in the premiere. "Now, I've embarked on this mission to continue the knuckleball legacy. These guys were great athletes on the gridiron so I wanted to try this experiment out. You don't have to grip the baseball the way I threw it, but if you want to win, you have to lose the spin."

Flutie, who I refuse to believe is actually 50 years old, is the biggest name among the contestants, and he's the presumed favorite here to win the thing. If he can drop-kick a football through the uprights, among his various other athletic talents, I figure he can probably figure out how to throw a decent knuckleball. Given his legendary competitiveness, I suspect he probably mastered it before the show began taping. But there are some other interesting names in the mix.

Former Marlins first-round pick Josh Booty -- who was selected fifth overall as a third baseman in the 1994 MLB Draft, seven spots ahead of Nomar Garciaparra -- had 30 plate appearances in the majors from 1996-98 before quitting to play quarterback at Louisiana State. He spent three seasons in the NFL, never playing a regular-season game.

I saw Booty play numerous games when he was at Double A Portland in 1997 and '98, and he might have had the best third base arm I've ever seen in person. How that translates to tossing a knuckleball, well, I have no idea. But the raw talent is there.

His brother, John David Booty, the former Southern Cal quarterback and Vikings draft pick, is also a contestant, as is Ryan Perrilloux, who stuck briefly with the Giants after a controversial career at LSU and Jacksonville State, and ex-Seahawks draft pick and 2007 Patriots practice squad member David Greene, a lefty.

Though Wakefield will have been retired almost a year to the day that the program premieres, there has been something of a knuckleball renaissance recently, with R.A. Dickey (who will be a guest on the program) winning the National League Cy Young Award last season and the film "Knuckleball" becoming a critical success. The Red Sox even have a promising knuckleballer in their farm system, righthander Steven Wright, who could get to Fenway this season.

It should be fun to see if any of these guys with strong arms and no known experience with the pitch take to it at all.

I mean, besides Flutie. Knowing him, he'll probably be in the Red Sox rotation by June. Fifty isn't that old for a knuckleballer.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

NFL season concluded Sunday night, the equipment truck departs tomorrow, and Red Sox players are already trickling in to Fort Myers, ready to get the stench of 2012 off them and begin the new season.

All of that in mind -- as well as my own eagerness for baseball season, which never wanes -- Monday seemed like the perfect time to debut a new segment on Radio BDC. So we did. I joined Steve Silva and host Adam 12 for the first of what will be a weekly conversation (2 p.m. first pitch) about the state of the Red Sox.

I had a blast doing this and can't wait to see how it evolves once there are actual games being played. I'll post the podcast version here each week. Thanks for listening.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

For a few seasons now I've been been periodically ranking the current "importance" of each player on the Red Sox roster, counting down from 25 to 1. The exercise is a blast for me (even with the inevitable gripes about it being in gallery form), and each season's first edition, which usually runs in the weeks leading up to spring training, can sometimes provide clarity regarding the overall roster picture.

When putting together the version that ran Wednesday, which includes plenty worth debating, including my choice of Dustin Pedroia as No. 1, there were a couple of items regarding the composition of the roster that really jumped out to me.

For one, the Red Sox are extraordinarily deep in relief pitching, to the point that they should still have an excellent bullpen even if a couple of pitchers endure more than the usual volatility. I suspect this depth means John Farrell is being encouraged to have a very short leash with his starters. I also think it means Andrew Bailey is elsewhere by April 1 in the Bronx.

The lack of star power compared to recent Red Sox teams isn't exactly a news flash. Three years ago, I ranked Adrian Beltre No. 11 in February. If he were still here, he might rank No. 1 on this year's team.

But the overall roster depth is understated. There was a pretty compelling group of players that didn't make the top 25. For the sport of it, let's rank our 10 honorable mentions here. Thanks for playing along.

26. Daniel Bard
Well, John Farrell's report after visiting with Bard was encouraging, and I suppose it counts for something that Bard has recovered from lost seasons before to pitch very effectively. But until we see him on the mound again, throwing to live batters and maintaining that old arm slot that Farrell says he has rediscovered, the images of last year's disaster linger. We can hope for the best, but it's foolish to expect it before he's thrown a pitch with a purpose.

27. Rubby De La Rosa
That he has Pedro Martinez in his corner -- and helping him master a changeup -- is reason enough to be giddy about his potential, but it's also worth noting that the 23-year-old righthander who came over in the Dodgers blockbuster has already had some success in the majors, whiffing 60 in 60.1 innings for the Dodgers in 2011. I'll bet you he'll be much higher on these rankings at season end.

28. Ryan Lavarnway
Three Red Sox players since 1965 had an OPS below .500 in 150 or more plate appearances. George Scott in 1968 (387 PAs, .473 OPS, and yes, Boomer made a heck of a recovery), Marc Sullivan in 1987 (173 PAs, .435 OPS, position: catcher/Haywood's boy), and Lavarnway (166, .459 last year). While the similarity to Sullivan's '87 season is striking, I'll buy the party line that he was simply worn down at season's end. But he's 25, and it needs to happen soon.

29. Jose Iglesias
You know the deal. His defense is spectacular. His bat is salami. And the former does not justify the latter's place in the lineup. As much as we look forward to watching his spectacular nightly feats with the glove, the reality is that Iglesias, who has a .589 OPS in 783 Pawtucket plate appearances, needs to prove he can hit Triple A pitching first.

30. Jackie Bradley Jr.
In 2006, 22-year-old Jacoby Ellsbury put up an .821 OPS at Double A Portland in 225 plate appearances. The next season, he bounded from Portland to Pawtucket to Boston, starring in the 2007 World Series. In 2012, the 22-year-old Bradley put up an .809 OPS in 271 plate appearances. I'm not saying he'll travel along the same accelerated path this year. But I have tremendous respect for this kid's ability and work ethic, and I'm not about to suggest he can't get to Fenway before September.

31. Mauro Gomez
The righthanded Roberto Petagine.

32. Clayton Mortensen
According to FanGraphs' pitch-type data, Mortensen threw his changeup 25.5 percent of the time at an average velocity of 81.4 miles per hour. I'd have guessed 65 percent of the time at 65 miles per hour. His change is mesmerizing, and it served him well for the most part last season (3.21 ERA, 8.8 K/9) during his 26 big-league appearances. Pretty good guy to have as an extra arm.

33. Alex Wilson
Big righthander converted to the bullpen last season at Pawtucket and could get his shot if attrition claims approximately a half-dozen relievers ahead of him on the depth chart. Whiffed 9.7 batters per nine innings last season, but allowed too many baserunners (1.50 WHIP).

34. Brock Holt
Acquired in the Joel Hanrahan trade, the 24-year-old infielder has hit .317 with an .808 OPS in four minor league seasons. His glove may not play at shortstop, which could hamper his chances of having Willie Bloomquist's career.

35. Ryan Sweeney
He says he's done punching doors. Now, if he could just hit a few more baseballs off the Fenway walls.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

New England sports fans have been so incredibly blessed during the last decade-plus, with the four major sports franchises (sorry, Revo) tallying seven championships since 2001. But we're also reminded of that old Tom Brady go-to line when he's asked which championship is his favorite: "The next one.''

I chatted with Kevin Paul Dupont on the topic of which Boston team will deliver that next one on "Globe 10.0" the other day. But two minutes of jovial bickering apparently didn't do the topic justice since the idea has been ricocheting around in my skull ever since, so here's a couple hundred bonus words on the topic ...

RED SOX
Championship contention? This franchise? I don't know. Do you know? I don't know.

I've gone on record time and again this winter as approving of Ben Cherington's long-range approach toward restoring this franchise's credibility on and off the field. Signing proven, respected veterans to short-term deals as the bridge to a core of prospects the organization truly believes in, all the while holding the reasonable expectation that previously established high-caliber players will return to health and/or form, is a very prudent way to go.

The 2013 Red Sox are going to be better than conventional wisdom suggests, in part because it's actually overlooked how dismal their roster was from August 1 on last season, when they lost 42 of their final 58 games. They're going to be likable and capable, and it feels like they have been neither for a long time, so at least we have that.

But does that translate to true contention? Probably not, unless a deep bullpen masks all question marks in the rotation, everyone in the lineup has a healthy, productive year, a premier player who fits their needs becomes available at midseason, and either Jackie Bradley or Xander Bogaerts emerges ahead of schedule. That's probably too much to ask, but at least the Red Sox will be worth your time again.

Next season of serious contention: I'm telling you, they'll be in the wild card mix this year, but that doesn't count, does it? Let's go with 2015, though I don't think even Cherington's crystal ball can provide an accurate forecast at this point.

CELTICS
If we couldn't admit it before Rajon Rondo's injury, we can now: The only way the Celtics were going to have a shot at reaching the NBA Finals is if Dwyane Wade went on a league-wide rampage of cheap shots unprecedented since the collective 1987 Pistons, with his misguided hackery, undercutting, and elbow-stomping somehow claiming teammate LeBron James along the way. So yes, we're saying there was a chance.

I'll miss watching Rondo doing stuff like this ...

... and this ...

... and I have no idea where Danny Ainge goes from here, though Zach Lowe's suggestion that the Celtics and Warriors might have a match with a Paul Pierce for Harrison Barnes/Richard Jefferson swap at least elicited a "hmmmm, interesting."

Next season of serious contention: Probably about the time Tim Duncan's son is eligible for the draft. He's five.

PATRIOTS
Rodney Harrison, whom Bill Belichick really should have cloned for future use during his peak years, is on The Dan Patrick Show as I'm writing this, and he just admitted to something that surprised me, though maybe it shouldn't. After some prodding by Patrick and a couple of verbal detours about the challenges of Super Bowl week, Harrison admitted that he thinks about the Patriots' Super Bowl loss in 2007 far more often than he considers the victories in 2003 and '04.

I suppose it's not news that he's tormented by the David Tyree catch, but it was a jarring reminder that the Patriots have had an almost unfathomable string of "what-ifs" since that last championship eight years ago. What if Harrison can pry that ball loose? What if Rob Gronkowski isn't injured last season and again this year? What if Deion Branch was still here in '06? What if ... well, that's enough. You don't require the reminders.

It's been a truly extraordinary dozen years for the Patriots -- they don't get enough credit for essentially turning over their entire roster save for the quarterback without as much as a hiccup -- and that should never be taken for granted. I just hope we never get to the point around here of remembering the disappointments ahead of the many victories.

Next season of serious contention: The pursuit of the elusive fourth ring -- that coveted "next one'' -- for Tom Brady and Bill Belichick begins anew in September.

BRUINS
Now, I'm not disregarding all of the people who lost income when the NHL owners and players were engaged in their petty little lockout showdown. But purely from a hockey sense, is it possible that all of the labor melodrama actually benefited the Bruins in a meaningful way?

A league-high 12 of their players went overseas, giving them somewhat of a conditioning advantage. The core of their championship team from two years ago is still intact, so perhaps training camp isn't as essential to them as it is to teams with considerable roster turnover. They have tremendous depth and should be able to navigate the condensed schedule with relative ease. Nathan Horton got extra time to make sure the clouds had gone away.

And how about that fortunate timing, essentially beginning their season as the Patriots were fading out? I think that went a long way toward limiting the potential lockout backlash, almost as if Boston fans realized, "Wait, how fortunate are we to be going from one championship contender right into the season of another?" OK, maybe it didn't quite work that way. You guys just can't resist hockey.

Next season of serious contention: We're five games into it. Thank goodness they came back.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

If you will, permit me one more extended thought from what has quickly become Tito Week around here. (It's like Shark Week, but with snark instead of sharks.)

It's just that there are a couple of subtle insights in former Red Sox manager Terry Francona's new memoir that are getting lost amid the juicier anecdotes about his relationships with Manny Ramirez and Larry Lucchino and the championships and heartbreaks and other headline/excerpt material.

I want to spend a few sentences here acknowledging a couple of them, not just because they're part of what makes the book so engaging, but because they're particularly relevant to the current state and perception of the Red Sox. There are lessons to be learned here, reminders of some history that the Red Sox should strive to repeat and some they should not.

The first takes us back to August 2006. Theo Epstein was getting flame-broiled on the only significant sports radio station in the city -- talk about how things have changed -- for failing to swing a deal at the trading deadline to bolster a talented but injury-plagued roster. The Yankees went out and acquired Bobby Abreu, who promptly tormented the Red Sox in a five-game sweep that essentially lowered the curtain on Boston's season.

The backlash was brutal, the common, caterwauling refrain being that Epstein had sacrificed the season because he was unwilling to part with his precious prospects. Epstein, who had just returned to his GM chair after a brief hiatus spurred by philosophical differences with ownership (aka Sick of Lucchino Syndrome), saw it with a more clear-eyed, long-term perspective. Here's what he said at the time regarding the discipline necessary to take a big-picture approach when there's so much pressure to win immediately and annually, as recounted in the book.

"It's a longstanding impediment for the Red Sox. With the Red Sox there's been so much emphasis and building an uber team this year, so much focus on tomorrow's paper, so much focus on the Yankees. Some of that had to do with the end of the Yawkey regime. There's no doubt that we feel the only way to sustain success over a long period of time is to have a successful farm system ... Two years ago I said we were two years away. Finally we're at a point where the farm system is going to start paying dividends at the big-league level."

It actually had paid dividends before then. Jonathan Papelbon debuted on July 31, 2005, better remembered as the day Manny Ramirez was nearly traded for some baseball shepherd's pie made up of Mike Cameron, Julio Lugo, Lastings Milledge, and Aubrey Huff. Jon Lester came up in June 2006 and won his first five decisions. Kevin Youkilis emerged as a dependable everyday player in that window. Dustin Pedroia arrived in the August 2006 chaos and hasn't stopped chirping and hitting since. And just a season down the road, Jacoby Ellsbury and Clay Buchholz would make impressive debuts during the second World Series-winning season in four years.

That's an extraordinary collection of core players who arrived from within between championships. I don't think it requires a breaking news alert to suggest that's exactly the approach Ben Cherington is taking now. Perhaps the pressure is not the same -- the 76-113 record since September 1, 2011 has tempered daydreams of champagne celebrations and October duck boat parades just a bit -- but the discipline it takes to wait for the best of the farm system to arrive in lieu of a quick fix deserves praise.

Sure, there is risk in expecting Xander Bogaerts (my favorite Sox prospect since Hanley Ramirez) and Jackie Bradley Jr. (an on-base machine and the best defensive outfielder in the organization, Ellsbury included) to be everything their ability and the glowing Baseball America scouting reports suggest. They're being counted on to be important parts of the next great Red Sox team, and there's pressure on their shoulders. But belief in talented, determined players who are under team control for years isn't just the most prudent step toward building and sustaining a winning franchise. If it goes according to plan and the promise is fulfilled, it's far and away the most enjoyable way.

Of course, there is that gap that must be navigated until they arrive, and that brings us to an unnecessarily controversial comment Epstein made three seasons later when the franchise was at another crossroads and the next batch of prospects -- Ryan Kalish, Anthony Rizzo, Lars Anderson, Casey Kelly and Josh Reddick among them -- was presumably on the horizon.

Right -- the bridge year.

What Epstein said was more or less the same thing he said about patience in 2006, with one major difference -- he used a phrase that could easily be taken out of context, misinterpreted, and used against him in a way that had nothing to do with what he intended. Here's his original comment -- yep, the world premiere of the term we can't escape -- from December 2009:

"We talked about this a lot at the end of the year, that we're kind of in a bridge period. We still think that if we push some of the right buttons we can be competitive at the very highest levels for the next two years. But we don't want to compromise too much of the future for that competitiveness during the bridge period. We don't want to sacrifice our competitive during the bridge period just for the future. So we're trying to balance both of those issues."

As the book notes, it was a week later that the Red Sox gave a combined $98 million to John Lackey and Mike Cameron. So much for that. Cameron might have made some sense as a bridge to something younger or better -- he got hurt, and it didn't work. But Lackey was an overpriced luxury, and perhaps already damaged goods.

"I felt badly for Theo on that one,'' Francona recalls in the book. "I knew exactly what he meant, and it got taken so far out of context. I completely agreed with it when he said it. It [ticked] me off the way that it got twisted. He was saying that we're going to find a way to win, but we didn't want to commit money to players who weren't worth the money."

Which again brings us back to the present tense. The gripes about the Red Sox' approach this offseason have been consistent, if not relentless, and usually focus on their failure to sign Josh Hamilton. Who knows, maybe all of those emails and tweets are being ghost-written by NESN underlings on Tom Werner's orders, but it's disconcerting that after all the Red Sox have been through the last couple of seasons, after signing Carl Crawford for marketing rather than baseball reasons, after losing their way for a quick fix that only escalated the descent, and after getting a heaven-sent get-out-of-jail-free card last season from the Dodgers, that so many don't recognize or refuse to accept that the current approach across that bridge is the right one.

Signing proven, established, well-regarded if imperfect major league players to short-term deals is the smartest way to begin repairing this ball club, which had a truly abysmal roster last September. Chances are there will be a Mike Cameron or two among the bunch, a signing that just doesn't work out, because flops and busts always happen to every team in every single season. But many, if not most of the likes of Shane Victorino, Ryan Dempster, Mike Napoli, and Stephen Drew, should go a long way toward enhancing the core of Dustin Pedroia, Jon Lester, Jacoby Ellsbury, Will Middlebrooks and David Ortiz, all of whom were hurt or uncharacteristically ineffective last year. And all the while, Bogaerts and Bradley and their prospect peers should and will be striding closer and closer to the big leagues.

That's how they escape this malaise.

I understand the skepticism to some degree -- Cherington has made mistakes (I cringe at trading young position players for relief pitchers), and this franchise has made it easy even for the few among us who don't naturally lean toward cynicism to doubt anything and everything they do. But the inability or unwillingness of so many to recognize the current approach as the most logical and the one with the highest potential payoff reminds me of one last Francona comment from the book.

He said it in regard to second-guessing he endured after deciding to pitch Tim Wakefield on regular rest rather than Josh Beckett on short rest during Game 4 of the 2007 ALCS against the Indians. But it applies on a much grander scale, particularly when it comes to those who who'd rather complain about what the Red Sox aren't doing rather than trying to understand what they are.

"I understand the fans and media second-guessing,'' Francona said. "I'm a fan. I do it. I just wish people would remember we know a few things about the team that they maybe don't know. I have more information than anybody. And it's my job to know the team."

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I'm an accomplished Manny Ramirez apologist and I always will be, but man, to read "Francona: The Red Sox Years" and to see all of his exasperating antics collected in one place is to realize that managing him would have caused Tito to yank out every follicle of his own hair had he not already lost it.

My look at some of the most interesting insights and revelations in the book can be found here or in Tuesday's Globe. Much of my piece was Manny-centric, but there was a lot more that I wanted to mention. Hopefully it's not overkill and I can share a couple of more from his book co-authored with Dan Shaughnessy without seeming like I'm the one collecting royalties, because while Francona doesn't unload on the beer-and-chicken perpetrators like you'd hope (he seems mildly disappointed in Jon Lester and all but absolves Josh Beckett), he more than makes up for it by sharing several truly hilarious stories.

Here are three condensed anecdotes I wanted to mention, leading off with one that might have fit well in Joe Torre's "The Yankee Years.''

By 2009, [Derek Jeter's] routine in Red Sox games involved acknowledging Francona before his first at-bat of each game. Approaching home plate, Jeter would look over into the Boston dugout and gesture toward the Sox manager with his hand or bat. If Francona was momentarily distracted, Jeter would step back and wait for a response before proceeding with his work.

"A couple of times somebody in our dugout would have to nudge me and say, 'Hey, look over at him! He's waiting for you to wave back,'' said Francona.

... Once Jeter established the ritual, coaches in the Red Sox dugout noticed A-Rod started to mime the gesture. Francona never noticed. He wouldn't intentionally ignore Rodriguez, but he had too much to do and there were usually runners on base by the time A-Rod came to the plate.

Ah, the ol' I'm-too-busy-to-wave-Jeter-and-Damon-are-already-on excuse. Suurrre. Kind of surprised A-Rod didn't stand there until he was acknowledged, no matter how long it took. I waved! I waved! Did you see me, Tito? I waved! Hi! HI! Why won't you wave? Derek always gets a wave!

Meanwhile, we learn that Dustin Pedroia is a chip off the ol' ... mom.

The American League MVP was in the middle of a wrecking ball weekend against the Royals ... [going] 8-19 with four doubles, a triple, and a homer. He also struck out swinging once, flailing at a curveball and leaving the bases loaded. The unfortunate at-bat was the focus of conversation when Francona and Dr. [Larry] Ronan tiptoed into [pregnant wife] Kelli Pedroia's hospital room after a game.

"It was unbelievable," Francona said. "We walked into the room and poor Kelli was laying there and Pedey and his mom were going at it over him swinging at that breaking ball in the dirt. I looked at Larry and said, 'This is like a reality TV show.'"

"All true,'' confirmed Pedroia. "My mom just blew me up for swinging at that ball in the dirt. We're all in the hospital room with Kelli and my mom was [hassling] me, saying, 'What the [expletive] is wrong with you?' and Kelli's mom was there and then Tito and Dr. Roman walked in. If I play bad and the media gets on me, that's a piece of [expletive] cake compared to my mom and what I have to go home to. I never hear the end of it. So when Tito and Doc walked in and heard all that, I was like, 'Welcome to my world.' "

And here's one more quick one on another Francona favorite, Curt Schilling:

Schilling's ego and outsized personality never bothered the manager. ... "He knows he talks too much, but he's always prepared. The things that irritate other people -- his face on TV and his politics -- I didn't care. I respected him a lot and have as much affection for him as any player I've ever had."

Schilling also protected his teammates. Francona never forgot a game in Philadelphia in which Schilling three a 100-mile-per-hour fastball at Deion Sanders, then asked, "What is he going to do about it, arm-tackle me?"

There's lots more, and if you're a Red Sox fan, I'll say this: the book, perhaps by design but effectively and honestly so, will make you appreciate Francona and all he went through, even if you didn't while he was here.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

No one? Not one? No fun.

For all of the drama and controversy and, yes, embarrassing sportswriter self-aggrandizing in the build-up to this year's Baseball Hall of Fame voting, it's a letdown, albeit not an unexpected one, that no contemporary player among this year's 37 candidates earned the requisite 75 percent for election Wednesday.

The ballot debate this year made the Mike Trout vs. Miguel Cabrera MVP argument look like a friendly conversation among buddies in the bleachers, and the result was more frustrating. I'm glad it's over and yet bummed by the outcome.

But hey, should be a great turnout in Cooperstown this summer to celebrate Pre-Integration Committee selections Jacob Ruppert, Deacon White, and Hank O'Day, none of whom lived into the 1940s. Maybe they can hologram 'em up, Tupac-style, to give their speeches.

As for those who any of us actually saw on a baseball field live and in color, none were particularly close to election.

Craig Biggio, the durable Astros catcher/second baseman/center fielder, was tops in his first year on the ballot with 68.2 percent, leaving him 39 votes shy of election. He will get in someday, and I suppose it would be appropriate if it happens the same year as longtime teammate Jeff Bagwell (third in the balloting in his third year, 59.2 percent), one of the finest all-around first baseman ever (149 OPS+) and definitely better than Scott Cooper.

Jack Morris was second, up one percent from last year at 67.7 percent. Say this: He gives you lots of years on the ballot and a chance to get elected.

The most encouraging sign -- and I suppose even occasional visitors to this corner of Boston.com can guess what's next -- is that Tim Raines made the biggest leap among players who will be on the ballot next year, jumping from 48.7 percent to 52.2. Only Dale Murphy, in his 15th and final year, saw a greater increase in support, and it's not unjust to suggest that was a sympathy/farewell boost for one of the most gracious players of any generation.

Raines seems to be swaying veteran voters -- my colleagues Bob Ryan, Dan Shaughnessy, and Nick Cafardo voted for him, and I'd bet none did when he was first eligible. (Peter Abraham has been on board longer.) Jonah Keri, North America's Official Go-To Expos Dude, told me this morning he'd throw a parade if Raines got to 60 percent, but was hoping for 55. The bump wasn't quite so big, but it was nonetheless encouraging. He's getting in eventually. To me, that's about the only good news of the day.

A couple of other quick thoughts:

Conclusions we can draw from the first year of eligibility for Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and Sammy Sosa, a.k.a. the PED 3? Well, I thought Clemens and Bonds would end up right in that 35-40 percent range, and they did. I was surprised that Clemens (37.6 percent) topped Bonds (36.2), the all-time home run king. (Insert your own asterisk here). Imagine there's an element of the voting base that confused him being found not guilty on perjury charges with never having had Brian McNamee jab him with a needle.

I think we can conclude that Sammy Sosa, who had three 60-homer seasons yet got just 12.5 percent of the vote, is never getting in, the perception being that his greatness wasn't previously established before the PED allegations as it was with Clemens and Bonds. Which is probably fair.

This is the first time since 1996 that no player was elected. That ballot included six future Hall of Famers -- Don Sutton, Bruce Sutter, Phil Niekro, Ron Santo, Tony Perez, and Jim Rice, who received 35.3 percent of the vote on his second year eligible. (Bill Buckner received 2.1 percent, for what it's worth.) Of course, you could argue that all six of those players -- three of whom received below 40 percent of the vote that year -- are fringe Hall of Famers at best. I actually like this year's class much better in terms of actual qualifications, and I'd bet the Bagwell, Biggio, Raines, Schilling, Bonds, Clemens, and Mike Piazza all make it in someday. Perhaps Edgar Martinez (35.9 percent) as well.

Meanwhile, Alan Trammell (33.6 percent) got nearly half the votes of his '80s Tiger teammate Morris despite having 27.8 more Wins Above Replacement (baseball-reference version) over his career. And Fred McGriff (20.7 percent) continues to be overlooked and underrated. It's a crime, dog.

Stunned that Kenny Lofton is one-and-done on the ballot, earning just 3.2 percent. I'm not sure I would have ever actually voted for him, but there can be legitimate comparisons drawn between his career and Raines's. His dismissal after a single year isn't as egregious as Lou Whitaker's (2.9 percent in '01, top career comp: Ryne Sandberg) or Bobby Grich's (2.6 percent in '92), but it's certainly curious. You'd hope it's not the case, but it's easy to wonder whether Lofton's well-earned reputation as a pain-in-the-Assenmacher with the media cost him a little bit.

If I were going to sneak one "no chance" guy onto my hypothetical ballot, it probably would have been Julio Franco, who played until he was 48 and was always a fun player to watch. (I'd never have done it over a qualified candidate, though.) Franco got six votes, which is six more than Todd Walker -- a brief pause to acknowledge his superb performance in the '03 postseason -- or 300 HR/300 SB guy Reggie Sanders, or slugger Ryan Klesko, or a handful of other quality players who went oh-fer on their lone at-bat on the ballot.

Who Voted For Aaron Sele? Sounds like next summer's cheesy ABC mystery soap-opera. What a cliffhanger. Just hope it wasn't someone I know.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

So let me lead off with this: Pedro Martinez, eligible for the Hall of Fame for the first time two years from now, gets in on the first ballot, right? The most dominating pitcher you, me, or Karim Garcia ever saw, the player who exceeded league averages over the course of his career by a greater margin than any starting pitcher in history, is close to unanimous in our corner of the world and should get the 75 percent from the Baseball Writers Association of America in that first year of eligibility, correct?

You're with me, right? Pedro, mortal lock right away? OK, good. Maybe I'll see you there, in the Cooperstown summer of 2015. You know Pedro will deliver a hilarious, thoughtful speech. Can't wait until then.

As for now ... excuse me for looking down the road a couple of years, but I imagine I don't have to delve too far into an explanation for you to understand where I'm coming from. I adore everything about the Baseball Hall of Fame -- the concept, the location, the exhibits, the celebrations, the debate over who belongs and who doesn't, Jay Jaffe's candidate-by-candidate JAWS breakdowns, all of it.

My professional dream -- a pipe dream probably, but one I hang on to like Adam Greenberg in search of one big-league at-bat -- is to someday have a vote, to be privileged to participate in the process that puts a coda on the most brilliant performers. One of my first posts on this blog eight years ago, and in a different incarnation, was on the Hall of Fame. I think I may have been pro-Jack Morris, which tells how long ago it was and how far all of this has come.

But this year, the buildup to Wednesday has been exasperating more often than not. It just hasn't been fun, which is precisely what it should be, and of course much of that is on the purported dastardly deeds of Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, among others, engaged in to keep themselves playing at an unfathomably high level at an age when athletes' bodies typically refuse to cooperate as much as they once did. Bonds and Clemens are both on the ballot for the first time, and so what should be a day of celebration feels more like a day of reckoning, a chance for some sportswriters who were fooled by certain players' scientifically engineered late-career feats to give them their comeuppance.

The mass arrival on the ballot of the Superstars of the Performance-Enhancing Drug Era seems to have emboldened some writers in another negative way. The bitterness-fueled patronization and dismissal of the sabermetrically inclined seems even more venomous this year, and some voters are making this complex, controversial ballot about themselves. One Philadelphia writer is voting only for Dale Murphy, a two-time MVP and fringe candidate in his final year on the ballot. Why? Because he was nice. A blogging New York-based curmudgeon is voting only for Morris, who, as Fangraphs' Dave Cameron points out, pitched 563 more innings than Curt Schilling and allowed 569 more runs.

Morris, who pitched a brilliant Game 7 in the 1991 World Series but was essentially Dave Stieb with a bushier mustache, received 66.7 percent of the vote last year and probably has the best chance of the 37 candidates of being elected. (The results will be announced at 2 p.m. Wednesday.) Because of the various lines in the sand and statements being made about what essentially is a very cool museum that has long enshrined its share of .330-hitting scoundrels (can't we put an asterisk on Clemens's and Bonds's plaques and move along?), it's possible that no one will be elected this year.

I hope someone gets in -- heck, I hope 8-10 someones get in. I realize I'm making my defense when the jury has already come to the verdict, but my hypothetical ballot would include Astros brothers Jeff Bagwell and Craig Biggio, Bonds and Clemens and their asterisks, Edgar Martinez and his 147 career OPS+, Mike Piazza, Alan Trammell (a much more worthy '80s Tiger than Morris, as was one-and-done candidate Lou Whitaker), Curt Schilling, and of course, Tim Raines, whose candidacy continues to gain steam as more voters realize just how brilliant he was in the shadow of Rickey Henderson:

I'll run through the streets dressed as Youppi! if Raines is elected. But I'll be pleasantly surprised if any of my choices is. The summer in Cooperstown just won't be the same without a newly confirmed legend or two to celebrate. But the voters don't seem inclined to agree on 75 percent of anything this year, and who's to say it will change in the immediate future?

Well, at least until Pedro comes along in two years. If you can't agree on his worthiness, the process is more hopeless than it feels today.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

During the final weeks of his lone, tumultuous season as Red Sox manager, Bobby Valentine semi-jokingly offered to punch WEEI host Glenn Ordway "right the mouth" for suggesting he'd given up on the season.

Three months after Valentine was fired following 69 wins, 93 losses, and countless controversies as the Red Sox manager, he's gone from sparring -- verbally, that is -- with sports radio hosts to becoming one.

NBC Sports Group will announce Monday that Bobby Valentine is joining the NBC Sports Radio roster. He will host his own daily sports-talk program on the network, heard in Boston on 1510 AM, beginning in April. In the interim, he will make weekly call-ins to network affiliates.

The news of Valentine's new job was first reported by Sports Illustrated's Richard Deitsch.

“I think in my years here on earth, I have let people know I have an opinion about pretty much everything,” Valentine told Sports Illustrated. “I think I will remain true to that.”

The groundwork for Valentine to join NBC Sports Radio was laid less than three weeks after he was fired by the Red Sox. During an interview with "Costas Tonight" host Bob Costas that was recorded October 22 and aired the next day -- an interview that generated more controversy when Valentine said injured designated hitter David Ortiz "decided not to play anymore" after the Red Sox' trade with the Dodgers in late August -- Valentine was approached by a network executive with the idea of hosting his own show.

Given the disdain he showed for the genre during many of his weekly appearances on WEEI last season -- including the aforementioned contentious back-and-forth with Glenn Ordway in September -- the sports-radio path might seem a surprise.

But Valentine has extensive electronic media experience, most recently as an analyst for ESPN's "Sunday Night Baseball" before taking the Red Sox job. With ESPN lukewarm at best about any possibility of bringing him back, it's a reasonable opportunity, and one he said he's looking forward to approaching with candor.

"If I have a fault, it's that I tell the truth,'' he told Sports Illustrated. "You can't dictate to the customer what they want and I think a good host feels his audience and understands what they want and need and tries to provide it."

Valentine does have a couple of crucial characteristics of sports-talk host. He can talk a good game, and he's willing to defend his point of view.

“I think the only time I had a problem with someone on the other side of the microphone is when they crossed over the personal line or they were totally incorrect in whatever they were representing,'' he said. "I am going to try and not get personal. And I’m also going to try to be correct as often as possible.”

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

After I wrote earlier this week that the Red Sox might be better than you think -- right, the one headlined "Red Sox might be better than you think'' -- the response was, well, let's call it predictably divided. Maybe 40 percent of the e-mailers and Twitterati had some level of optimism for the '13 Sox.

The rest suggested, some more creatively than others, that I was seeing things through carmine-colored glasses. Which is cool. My optimism is genuine and rooted in research and reason, and no, I certainly do not mind that it stands out against the backdrop of frequent, lucrative half-contrived Chicken Little caterwauling around here.

But I do also feel like further elaboration may be required to explain why I believe, with sincerity and logic, that the Red Sox will be a much better team this season. (Go ahead, I'll wait while you insert the usual caveat about unforeseen catastrophes here).

My point, in taking that player-by-player spin through what the 25-man roster looks like roughly six weeks before pitchers and catchers report, was that Ben Cherington's free-agency repair work has at the very least given them legitimate major league depth.

Exaggerating the importance of this may not be possible. In bringing in the likes of Shane Victorino, Stephen Drew, Ryan Dempster, David Ross, Joel Hanrahan, Koji Uehara, and eventually Mike Napoli, at the very least they've acquired proven competence. Sure, one or two won't work out -- there will be a 2002 Tony Clark in the mix.

But this is a team, as Peter Gammons noted recently, that got 5 wins, 20 losses and a 7.13 out of 31 starts from Aaron Cook, Daisuke Matsuzaka, and Zack Stewart. It's a team that gave more than 1,600 total plate appearances to Pedro Ciriaco, Scott Podsednik, Ryan Sweeney, Nick Punto, Mauro Gomez, James Loney, Marlon Byrd, Ryan Kalish, Darnell McDonald, Ryan Lavarnway, and Jose Iglesias. Some of them were adequate, and some could be better than adequate this year, but that is a lot of playing time for players who didn't provide a lot of hope. It's a wonder 2012 Tony Clark didn't get a few September at-bats.

One superstar, one we-gotta-do-something-big commitment to Josh Hamilton, wasn't going to solve all that went wrong last season. They needed to find complementary quality amid the necessary influx of quantity, and they have.

My theory is that so many of those who are skeptical about Cherington's offseason approach stopped paying attention right around the time the Dodgers presented their unfathomable gift of a truly fresh start, and in assessing the misery of last season look at the record rather than how they wound up there. Which, in short, was an unprecedented ravaging of injuries, and under-performance by established, star-level players, concepts which are not mutually exclusive.

The Red Sox were five games over .500 on July 1. They were at .500 at the All-Star break. There reasonable was hope of a hot streak, of legitimate playoff contention. But the injuries never ceased and the hot streak never came. Jon Lester was chronically ineffective in by far the worst season of his fine career, Jacoby Ellsbury had a prolonged recovery from his second high-impact injury in three seasons, and Dustin Pedroia's numbers suffered when he tried to play through a hand injury.

Pedroia led the Red Sox in bWAR -- but his 4.7 was the lowest team-best number since Fred Lynn's 4.5 in 1980. Under-performance was a factor, but it was injuries that destroyed them. The Red Sox used a franchise-record 56 players, required 42 transactions involving the disabled list, and lost nearly 1,500 total player-games to injury.

David Ortiz, one of two major league hitters with an OPS over 1.000 in more than 350 plate appearances last season, played one game after July 16. The Red Sox were 22-49 in his absence. Will Middlebrooks, the slugging rookie third baseman, played his last game Aug. 10. The Red Sox were 13-35 thereafter.

Bobby Valentine's remark that he had the worst roster in the history of baseball in September was snide, typical, and unnecessary, but let's just say the Red Sox' 16-42 record after Aug. 1, with a -109 run-differential, was a reasonably accurate representation of the talent they were putting on the field. I say that with no offense intended to the 42 hits in 181 plate appearances flawed fan-favorites Ciriaco and Daniel Nava provided in September/October.

The 2013 Red Sox need John Farrell to help Lester find his form. They need Ellsbury, the best position player in the AL two years ago, to avoid collisions at all costs. They need Pedroia to ... well, to be himself, though it wouldn't hurt if he took a maintenance day from time to time. They're counting on the return to form of previously accomplished, trustworthy players, they're counting on a deep and versatile bullpen to prevent them from going 17-22 in one-run games and 2-10 in extra innings again, and they're counting on the influx of proven if imperfect veterans to be at least competent in supporting roles. It's not flashy, but it makes all the sense in the world.

Oh, and one more thing: Bobby Valentine's no longer around to continuously show off his patented parlor trick of making everything worse. Wouldn't you say that alone is reason enough to know that 2013 is going to be much better?

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I can't think of a Boston sports team in recent memory that so needed the fresh start of a new year like the 2012 Boston Red Sox. Probably the 2001 collection of bitter misfits, but as despicable as that Everett/Lansing/Kerrigan/Offerman mishmash was, it did win 13 more games than the Disaster of 2012.

Not to digress too much on that 2001 team pack of buffoons, but the approach that offseason was somewhat similar to the one Ben Cherington is taking now -- collecting proven veterans who had good clubhouse reputations, from John Burkett, Tony Clark, and Carlos Baerga to the essential (and high-priced) Johnny Damon and beloved egomaniac  Rickey Henderson. The Red Sox improved to 93 wins the next year, which was seven wins under their Pythagorean projection. I suspect Grady Little remains blissfully unaware of this.

Anyway, that's my long and winding way of saying that I think the 2013 Red Sox -- enhanced with competence this offseason if nothing else -- are going to be better than the current consensus projection in 2013. With the acknowledgment that some redundancy on the roster still needs to be addressed and they'll have more bench depth than I've accounted for, here's a rundown of what the 25-man roster might look like if the season began today. Which it doesn't. But I wish it did, don't you?

LINEUP
1. Jacoby Ellsbury, CF: Every time I hear how he's soft or too mellow for the Boston baseball scene, I think back to September 2011, and his .350/.400/.677 slash-line that month while pretty much everyone else sprinted away from the implosion, and I wonder how his perception would be different had the Sox somehow won two more games.

2. Shane Victorino, RF: Did you know he has a biography, which was available on the shelves during my pre-Christmas visit to the Portsmouth, N.H., Barnes and Noble? He has a biography.

3. Dustin Pedroia, 2B: His most similar player statistically thus far also happens to be someone who predated him by a few years as a Red Sox second base prospect -- yep, Freddy Sanchez. Bet you didn't see that one coming. He turns 30 in August, and I do worry about his long-term durability given his admirable but perhaps counterproductive refusal to play any other way but all-out, all the time.

4. David Ortiz, DH: His 1.026 OPS in 383 plate appearances last season was second in baseball (to Cincinnati's Joey Votto) among all players with as many or more plate appearances.

5. Will Middlebrooks, 3B: If he's what he appeared to be on his many good days as a rookie, he'll be the quintessential No. 5 hitter. But that 13/70 BB/K ratio suggests we should leave some room for occasional growing pains.

6. Mike Napoli, 1B: It'll get done. Why? Because ...

... and featuring Lou Gossett Jr. as Ben Cherington. Classic typecasting there, you know.

7. Jarrod Saltalamacchia: He's a likable sort, but you know a season really went wrong when the team-leader in home runs had a .288 on-base percentage and whiffed 119 times against 24 walks. Can't imagine he's around come April 1 in the Bronx.

8. Jonny Gomes, DH/LF: In 1,100 career plate appearances against lefthanded pitchers, he has 50 homers and an .894 OPS. Now about finding him that lefty platoon partner ...

9. Stephen Drew, SS: He had 76 extra-base hits in 2008 -- 44 doubles, 11 triples, 21 homers. Derek Jeter's career-high for XBH is 70, set when he went 37-9-24 in 1999.

ROTATION
10. Jon Lester, LHP: The lefty, who turns 29 on January 7, entered September 2011 with the highest winning percentage among qualified active pitchers (75-31, .707). He's 10-17 since, and now seventh on the list, behind Roy Halladay, Jered Weaver, Justin Verlander, Tim Hudson, CC Sabathia and Johan Santana. Get it together, man.

11. Clay Buchholz, RHP: Buchholz was the only pitcher in the majors with an adjusted ERA of 95 in 2012. Slightly below average doesn't come close to cutting it for the presumed No. 2 starter in '13.

12. John Lackey, surgically repaired RHP: I'm not saying it's certain he was damaged goods when the Red Sox signed him, but I bet he felt some twinges in that right elbow picking up the pen to sign that contract. Healthy now, he'll help.

13. Ryan Dempster, RHP: In 12 starts for the Rangers, he had a 5.03 ERA -- but in seven of those starts, he pitched at least six innings while allowing two or fewer earned runs.

14. Felix Doubront, LHP: Pros: Lefthanded, struck out more than a batter per inning with 167 Ks in 161 IPs, and his 4.37 FIP looks a little better than his 4.86 ERA. Cons: Got into the Lesterian habit of letting presumably bad calls affect him, allowed more than a hit per inning, must lower 4.0 walk rate.

BULLPEN
15. Joel Hanrahan, RHP: Top career comp through age 30 is -- gulp -- Todd Jones. Has a 203 adjusted ERA in his superb 2011 season ... yet it would rank as the third-best season of Andrew Bailey's career.

16. Andrew Bailey, RHP: One real conclusion I can draw from this exercise -- he's gone, outta here, adios, sayonara. Circumstantial evidence has suggested it for a while now -- the rumors that he would be the compensation sent to Toronto for John Farrell and the immediate decision to anoint Hanrahan the closer, for starters. But if you look at the depth and versatility of this 'pen and where everyone slots, he seems out of place. This is a guy who had 75 saves and an ERA slightly about 2.00 in his first three seasons and had a fluke injury last year that ruined his first season in Boston. I have eight relievers on the roster now including him and excluding Rubby de la Rosa (love PeteAbe's prediction for him), Daniel Bard, Clayton Mortensen and Chris Carpenter, among others. There's no chance of carrying eight. It sure looks like he's going to be one-and-done here, and I'm curious why they seem so ready to move on from him.

17. Junichi Tazawa, RHP: I think I've said this before recently, or at least some variation. In fact, I know I have. But I'm going to repeat it again, because it's the holiday season and you might have missed it and I think it's one of the more encouraging statistics regarding how the 2013 Red Sox will find success. Here goes ...

18. Koji Uehara, RHP: ... in a combined 74 appearances -- 37 each -- and 80 innings last season, Tazawa and Uehara allowed 57 hits, 14 earned runs, and 8 walks while compiling 88 strikeouts. That's a 1.57 ERA and a 0.81 WHIP.

19. Andrew Miller, LHP: Baseball America's No. 10 prospect in 2007, sandwiched between Justin Upton and Tim Lincecum (with Daisuke Matsuzaka No. 1. Yes, 1. First. Dice-K.)

20. Franklin Morales, LHP: Baseball America's No. 8 prospect in 2008, sandwiched between Clayton Kershaw and Homer Bailey (with David Price 10th).

21. Craig Breslow, LHP: No. 2 career comp: Hideki Okajima.

22. Alfredo Aceves, RHP: Your resident rubber-armed lunatic in the Julian Tavarez tradition, his 2011 season stands as the reminder of his capabilities when his focus is on pitching rather than insubordination.

BENCH
23. David Ross, C: Career OPS+: 100. Career OPS+ with the Red Sox: minus-35. I expect that to improve.

24. Pedro Ciriaco, INF: Versatility and speed give the 27-year-old a chance at being a valuable bench player, but I'm surprised how many Sox fans suggest to me that he deserves a significant role. I figure most of them checked out on the season right around the time the BABIP-bumping flares stopped falling in (.560 OPS in 111 plate appearances in September).

25. Daniel Nava, placeholder: Gets on base against righthanded pitching (,369 career OBP), but doesn't offer much else and should probably abandon switch-hitting. Time for Ryan Kalish to become what he suggested he could be back in 2010.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

A special edition of Nine Innings as the Red Sox's quest to fill the entire 40-man roster with relief pitchers continues with the pending acquisition of Joel Hanrahan ...

1. Here's hoping that acquiring a new closer every offseason doesn't become to Ben Cherington what acquiring a new shortstop was to Theo Epstein through the middle of the last decade. So far, he's averaging a closer per winter as the Red Sox general manager, and I'm not sure that's quite the ideal ratio. Last winter, following the departure of Jonathan Papelbon via free agency to the Phillies, the Red Sox acquired the established if injury prone Andrew Bailey from the A's. Bailey promptly got hurt, and though it was a fluke injury rather than, say, a recurring sore elbow or something actually ominous, the deal for Hanrahan, who has 76 saves over the past two seasons, suggests that Bailey isn't held in the same regard by the Red Sox brain-trust as he was when he arrived here.

2. There's already speculation that the Red Sox intend to buttress their ace-free starting rotation by building a beast of a bullpen, with Bailey, Hanrahan, Uehara, and Junichi Tazawa all in key roles. I'm skeptical, not of the approach, but that it's feasible. Both Hanrahan and Bailey -- who had 75 saves with a 2.07 ERA in three seasons with the A's -- are established closers, which means they're both going to want to close. Given that there were rumors that Bailey (rather than Mike Aviles) would be the compensation sent to the Blue Jays for John Farrell, I suspect that he'll be among the sudden excess of relievers on the current roster who will be reporting to spring training somewhere other than Fort Myers.

3. The price for Hanrahan -- outfielder Jerry Sands, change-of-scenery candidate Mark Melancon, and righthander Stolmy Pimentel -- doesn't appear steep, though I'll amend that if Franklin Morales ends up going to Pittsburgh in an expanded version of the deal. And he's one more high-character, affable personality in the remodeled clubhouse. It's just that I'm not sure I'd prefer him over a healthy Bailey as he Red Sox' closer in '13, provided that such a thing as a healthy Bailey exists. On the surface, the hard-throwing 31-year-old righthander's numbers aren't bad, having posted a 2.72 ERA while allowing 40 hits and striking out 67 in 59.2 innings last season. But Hanrahan's walk-rate rocketed from 2.1 per nine innings in '11 to 5.4 last year, and his 4.45 FIP suggests that his ERA is seriously misleading. And his top-five most similar pitchers through age 30 will make a Sox fan shiver: Todd Jones, Mark Wohlers, Heathcliff Slocumb, Bobby Howry, and Antonio Alfonseca. Yeesh. And I cut it off before we got to Matt Mantei.

4. I was as adamant as anyone that Daniel Bard should be given a shot to start -- I'll pause while you point and laugh -- and it's hard not to think that had he been given the first shot to close, trades for both Bailey and Hanrahan wouldn't have been necessary. Here's hoping John Farrell can repair him, but right now, it's beyond optimistic to consider him a viable candidate for the roster.

5. Though I'm puzzled why anyone, pre-Stephen Drew deal, wanted him to start the season as the everyday shortstop when he still hasn't proven he can hit Triple A pitching adequately, I'm glad Jose Iglesias apparently isn't involved in this deal. If he can just hit .250 with more than an occasional walk, his spectacular glove will justify his place in the lineup. I want to find out whether he can do that. The quest should begin at Pawtucket in '13, but here's hoping it continues fruitfully at Fenway. Good-field, no-hit shortstops get frustrating fast, but his glove is so spectacular that just a little bit of competence at the plate would go a long way.

6.Besides, the rumor that Iglesias would be going to Pittsburgh had me wondering why Cherington seemed intent on establishing a trend as foolhardy and counterproductive as trading young position players for relief pitchers. I'm not sold on Josh Reddick long-term, and Jed Lowrie is about as sturdy as a fungo bat, but you'd hope those two deals would stand as a lesson on the value of young position players versus the year-to-year volatility of even proven relief pitchers. And it is curious that the Red Sox have apparently traded Melancon, one of the relatively high-profile relievers acquired last year, in a deal for Hanrahan, whose arrival could lead to the departure of last year's other touted relief pickup, Bailey.

7. Jerry Sands, we hardly knew ya. He didn't even get his chance to be the next Billy Ashley or even program the route from McCoy Stadium to Fenway into his GPS. I'm very curious how he will fare -- he put up big numbers in Albuquerque (at least when context and ballpark factors are dismissed), and John Valentin raved about him to Nick Cafardo. But he has just a.701 OPS in a decent sample of big-league plate appearances (251), and he doesn't have the skill-set to provide value elsewhere if he's not hitting for consistent power. Seems like he's the type of player the Pirates should be taking a flyer on.

8. By my quick count, Hanrahan will be the fifth significant player brought on board (Stephen Drew, Uehara, Shane Victorino and Ryan Dempster) since the Red Sox agreed to terms with the still unsigned Mike Napoli. Anyone out there expect it to happen at this point? Yeah, neither do I.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

In a combined 80 innings over 74 appearances last year, Uehara and Tazawa combined for 88 strikeouts and eight walks. Yes, eight. That's my cause for bullpen enthusiasm for the day.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

So I'm abandoning Tuesday's early game-plan to write about the Red Sox' acquisition of Stephen Drew. If you're a fairly regular visitor to this corner of Boston.com you're probably aware I evolved into a defender of his brother J.D. and essentially celebrate the entire Drew family catalog. Yep, even Tim.

I'm cool with the move, Ben Cherington's latest short-term, good-money deal for an established player, and that's that. I've already moved on to the next shiny piece of hot-stove conjecture.

According to multiple reports, the Dodgers are either shopping right fielder Andre Ethier or have at least listened to a couple of offers. Fox Sports's Ken Rosenthal had a relatively reserved report, saying a Dodgers executive told him they have "zero intention'' of trading the two-time All-Star but offered somewhat of a contradiction in acknowledging they will listen to offers.

Rosenthal noted that two American League clubs have inquired, and given that Ethier is a player Red Sox fans have occasionally pined for because A) he's pretty good and B) he's Dustin Pedroia's college buddy, it's natural to wonder whether Ben Cherington has dialed the 323 area code recently. At least for a reason other than reminiscing about or reenacting how the Nick Punto and Others blockbuster came about last August.

So to address the question in the headline, should Ethier be on the Red Sox' wish list this offseason? Seems to me the fundamental part of the answer is easy:

How much cash are the Dodgers kicking in?

While there is some suspense regarding the status of the Dodgers' 25-year, $6-billion television deal, the outlay of $215 million for this year's roster (or rosters -- I suspect they have enough players to form a second team in the NL West) suggests they are not particularly concerned with stashing away $10s and $20s right now.

In fact, there's speculation, or maybe it's more than that, that the Dodgers are indeed open to offers on Ethier because they want to sign Nick Swisher to replace him in right field. Which, exactly, is why the Dodgers should kick in money to move Ethier, who signed a five-year, $85 million contract extension last June: signing Swisher and losing a draft pick is a more appealing and responsible option than trading prospects for a player whose production is unlikely to justify his salary. (Fangraphs has him valued at $28.5 million total over the past two seasons.)

I'm not suggesting there's little to like about Ethier, who turns 31 in April. His adjusted OPS over the last five seasons has been between 123 and 133, and his career 123 OPS+ ties him for 29th with Jose Bautista and Kevin Youkilis among active players, He's reputed to be an above-average right fielder, though it must be noted that the only season in the past five in which he had a positive Ultimate Zone Rating came in 2011, the year he won the Gold Glove. He has some intriguing names on his career comp list -- Hunter Pence, Trot Nixon, and Youk among them. And he pummels righthanded pitching, putting up a .311 average/.387 on-base/.526 slugging slash-line (.913 OPS) over the course of his career.

Of course, that leads us into his fundamental flaw: he's truly abysmal against lefthanded pitching, with a .606 OPS last season and a .649 career mark (with a hideous .238/.296/.352 slash-line ). For perspective, the worst qualifying hitter in the AL last season in OPS, Oakland's Jemile Weeks, put up a .609 OPS against all pitching. When he's facing lefties, Ethier is on the short list of the worst hitters in baseball. His numbers aren't those of an everyday right fielder. That's a guy who should be the lefty half of a platoon with the likes of Jonny Gomes or Jerry Sands.

Ethier would be a name acquisition that so many are pining for at the expense of recognizing the Red Sox' long-term plan, not to mention that adding a player signed at least through 2017 (there's a vesting option for '18) would quell the conjecture that ownership is setting up to sell. And though I was caught looking with the surprise revelation that Ethier's OPS last season was the same as Mike Napoli's with the Rangers and Adrian Gonzalez's with the Red Sox, he is a good ballplayer.

But unless hitters with an .812 OPS are the new market inefficiency, the Red Sox should not pursue him without a hefty cash advance coming with him from Los Angeles. At that salary and with that platoon differential, he won't be a cornerstone of The Next Great Red Sox Team, unless the price is better than it is right now.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Don't know if you feel the same, but I presume I'm not entirely alone when it comes to waning enthusiasm for those requisite introductory press conferences after the Red Sox make a prominent acquisition or hire.

Whether it's the Mike Cameron/John Lackey double whammy in December 2009, or the Carl Crawford introduction two Decembers ago, or the Bobby Valentine grin-and-phony show at this point last year, it's tough to flash back to some of these glorified photo ops and not feel like the fool.

In too many recent cases the intro was the high point of the tenure.

So it was that I greeted Thursday's formal introduction of erstwhile Phillies and Dodgers outfielder Shane Victorino with the same curiosity and skepticism that accompanied the news that the Red Sox were awarding a three-year, $39 million contract to a 31-year-old outfielder who hit .255 with a .704 OPS last season.

While Victorino is an accomplished player -- a three-time Gold Glove winner, a two-time All-Star, and a one-time world champion -- there's legitimate concern about his ability to contribute at a high level at this point in his career. ESPN's Keith Law, noting Victorino's declining bat speed and suggesting he might be best suited as a fourth outfielder, ranked him 29th among all free agents, behind the likes of Ichiro, Lance Berkman, Ryan Ludwick, and the soon-to-be-pinstriped Kevin Youkilis.

To make a comparison I've desperately been trying to resist, Victorino's OPS last year was nearly 100 points less than Cameron's the season before his ill-fated union with the Red Sox. So, no, purely from a statistical standpoint, it's not the easiest transaction to comprehend.

Which is probably one small reason the Red Sox continue with the pomp-and-circumstance of the introductory press conference even after so many recently have become punch lines and cautionary tales in retrospect.

First, it gives Cherington an opportunity to explain, without the likelihood of too much push-back from the media, why the player appealed to him. And there was some relative insight to be found in his comments on Victorino.

"There were some times last year maybe he didn't feel quite the way he wanted to,'' Cherington said, apparently referencing a hand injury Victorino had early in the season. "What we wanted to do this offseason, as you guys know, is not just add to the outfield, but add to the outfield with a guy who is a center field-quality defender, and do that with a guy who can run the bases and hit and add the energy that Shane does, that's a really good fit for a lot of different reasons.

"We know the kind of player he has been over a long period of time. We know the kind of player he has been over the years and we're looking forward to seeing him out here. He's a big part of what we're trying to do. He's been a big part of good teams, and not just one, and he's going to be a big part of what we're doing."

In other words, it would be wonderful if he rediscovers his 2011 form, when he had an .847 OPS, hit 17 homers, and led the NL with 16 triples. But there's value, Cherington believes, in not just his all-around skills, but also his long-established reputation as a positive personality and a dependable teammate.

And maybe that's the other reason, at least in Victorino's case, an official introduction is a good idea. Because after being exposed to his genuine, gum-chomping, fast-talking enthusiasm about being a member of the Red Sox, it's difficult even for someone who usually teeters between skeptic and cynic to doubt that his presence will be a positive in one meaningful way at the least.

The press conference confirmed that Victorino gets it. He knows his value to the Red Sox goes beyond playing a fine right field and running the bases with energy and aggression.

"There was no convincing," said Victorino, who repeatedly said he was "ecstatic'' about his decision to join the Red Sox. "It's Boston. That in itself says it all. It's the Red Sox. ... I look at the chemistry on this team. I look at the makeup of this team. This is one of those things we can turn around. That's the goal. We don't want to be known as the team that didn't make the playoffs."

The Red Sox haven't made the playoffs in three seasons now. There was no shame in the injury-battered, Adrian Beltre/Victor Martinez 89-win team in 2010, but the past two seasons have been pockmarked by an epic collapse in September 2011 and the most toxic culture last year since the raging days of Carl Everett. There hasn't been much fun to be found recently in being a Red Sox fan.

Victorino can help change that. He played in the unforgiving Philadelphia market and thrived, and to hear him talk Thursday was to realize that even if he isn't the player he was two seasons ago, his presence instantly makes the Red Sox more likable. You bet that matters right now, on the slow climb out of the abyss.

"The last couple years has been definitely tough for the Boston organization," said Victorino. "At the end of the day we look beyond that now. We need to look forward to 2013 and being that organization that we can be.

"I'm going to be fun, I'm going to talk a lot, you're going to get what you're going to get. I'll be me, and I'll go out there and play 100 percent."

And should the value of Victorino's performance approach the value of his personality, well then, Thursday's introductory press conference will be one we'll be able to look back upon fondly.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

In the ballgames and seasons since Kevin Youkilis arrived in the major leagues on May 15, 2004 -- no doubt scowling intensely and already worked up into a full sweat -- there's been a significant shift in the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry.

The Red Sox have won two World Series, the Yankees one. As currently structured three months before pitchers and catchers head south, neither roster suggests the likelihood of championship contention in 2013. The Red Sox are rebuilding and recovering after the Bobby Valentine catastrophe and the necessary but franchise-altering August blockbuster with the Dodgers. The Yankees, talented but aging, are spending cautiously, and that is as odd to see in print as it is in concept given their history.

Sure, they still eyeball each other warily. But this isn't Fisk vs. Munson Punchout, or the Who-Is-Karim-Garcia heyday, when the mutual detest among the fanbases was deep and chronic and personal. There's something of a lull in the loathing. Frankly, both teams should be more concerned with the Rays, who got just what they needed when they heisted Wil Myers from the Royals, rather than each other.

That's my roundabout way of saying I'm surprised we're still getting worked up about whether the laundry is tinted with carmine or adorned with pinstripes. When I joked on Twitter in the wake of the news that Youkilis has agreed to a one-year, $12 million contract with the Yankees that we'll never be able to tell whether he's getting booed or cheered at Fenway, I was surprised by some of the venomous reactions, as if he'd violated some trust with the fans in front of whom he'd given his all for the first eight-plus seasons of his career, including two top-six finishes in the MVP balloting.

His decision to join the Yankees seems an easy one to me. They offered him $12 million for one season, a superior offer to the two years and $18 million he reportedly could have had to rejoin Terry Francona in Cleveland. As a player who arrived late -- he made his debut at age 25 -- and is apparently in early decline, taking a salary that is just a $250,000 pay cut from what he made last season makes endless sense, particularly since he's never hit a huge jackpot, with $44 million-plus in career earnings. He'll get a chance to rebuild his value replacing the injured Alex Rodriguez in a productive lineup where his patience will be valued even if he can't get his batting average above last year's .236. Taking sentiment out of it, it's a good place for him, just as it was for Wade Boggs in 1993 and more than a half-dozen ex-Red Sox since '04.

Of course, I understand that taking sentiment out of it isn't something everyone is willing or able to do. Johnny Damon, whose two-homer, six-RBI Game 7 performance in the 2004 ALCS was as clutch as you'll find in franchise history -- seriously, pause a minute and think about how he and fellow recent Yankee Derek Lowe altered history that night -- still gets booed around here for taking a few extra bucks to join the Yankees after the 2005 season. And Adam Vinatieri is inexplicably, dully razzed whenever he returns to Foxborough, seven seasons after he left for the Colts in a decision that worked out best for all involved.

As petty as those lingering grudges seem, they're more understandable than jeering Youkilis, who unlike Damon and Vinatieri really didn't have any say in whether he remained or departed. He was done in last season by frustration with the unfathomably tone-deaf buffoon of a manager, who gracelessly handled what should have been a delicate but accurate observation that Youkilis's skills were declining. Turning the third base job over to Will Middlebrooks was the right move, and trading Youkilis to the White Sox was necessary. It was telling that interest was so lukewarm that they got nothing in return but two roster-fodder players who have already moved on from the organization.

It's not as if Youkilis chose the Yankees over the Red Sox, who gave no indication of serious consideration about bringing him back. He chose his best offer, albeit one that oddly unites him with nemesis Joba Chamberlain and his noggin-seeking fastball, and that it happens to be with the Yankees is worthy of a shrug, not a boo. Besides, the above photo of his final moments in a Red Sox uniform before the inevitable trade serves as a reminder that he never wanted to leave in the first place. Don't blame him. It's how the process works.

And let's admit it -- you'd have "forgiven" Johnny Damon in a heartbeat had he chosen to return to the Sox when he was claimed on waivers late in the 2010 season, just as we would have had he ended up back on the roster before the all-important eight-year anniversary of the 2004 champs last year. We're always pushovers for a happy reconciliations. When Vinatieri retires -- if he ever retires -- I suspect Foxborough will be much more welcoming then to the greatest clutch kicker the sport has known. It had better be.

But with Youkilis, there's nothing to reconcile. He was a terrific player for a long time here, but injuries robbed him of some effectiveness, and a better player came along. That's the cruel if natural progression of sports. The Red Sox moved on without him, and even now that he's about to be a Yankee, it shouldn't affect the perception of him here. Maybe you'll boo when he comes back in pinstripes for the first time on July 19. But I'll hear the boos as that old, familiar salute: "Youuuuuuuuk!'' Here's hoping he does too.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

It probably should not come as a surprise that the documentary on Bo Jackson, which debuted Saturday, is the highest-rated film yet in ESPN's superb "30 for 30'' series, earning a 2.3 rating in major markets. "You Don't Know Bo'' was a perfect marriage and near-perfect execution of subject and format. I'm not sure which I've looked forward to more this week -- that film, or Monday's Patriots-Texans game. Both had the anticipatory vibe of major events.

The "30 for 30'' series, originally conceived by Bill Simmons as a way for ESPN to celebrate its 30th anniversary in 2009 by celebrating stories, moments, and personalities that shaped the sports landscape along the way, is an extraordinary ongoing success and now includes more than 50 films under its own or the "ESPN Presents" umbrella.

My personal rating of "You Don't Know Bo," which was directed by Michael Bonfiglio, among "30 for 30" films more or less corresponds with the Nielsen ratings. My four previous favorites are "The Best That Never Was" (directed by Jonathan Hock, on former Oklahoma running back Marcus Dupree), "The Two Escobars" (Jeff Zimbalist and Michael Zimbalist), "Into the Wind" (directed by Steve Nash and Ezra Holland, on Terry Fox) and "The Announcement" (Nelson George). Bo makes five. Organize them any way you see fit.

You almost wonder why Bo, whose did-he-really-just-do-that? athletic feats as an outfielder for the Kansas City Royals and as a running back/hobbyist for the Los Angeles Raiders made him a legend in his own, unfortunately abbreviated, time, wasn't a topic sooner. He's one of the first names I thought of when the project was announced. His 50th birthday was last week -- yeah, it was that long ago -- so this is as appropriate a time as any to pay proper homage.

Of course, you knew the legend of Bo. At least, I hope you did, and Saturday's film served as an entertaining, damn-they-got-this-right reminder rather than an introduction. He was an understated, matter-of-fact but engaging interview, clearly proud of his accomplishments but not defined by them. We were awed, but his shrug-and-a-smile tenor suggests that's who he always was, and thus expected to be.

I supposed I had some minor -- well, they aren't even big enough to be gripes. Call them observations of a trained nitpicker. I would have liked to have heard from football/baseball combo athletes who attempted the same crossover move, such as Brian Jordan or Deion Sanders, and yes, that's the only time I'll ever say I want to hear from Deion Sanders. Mark Gubicza and Marcellus Wiley were perhaps too prominent at the expense of more anecdotal voices, and there was redundancy in some talking heads' praise of his physical talent. Perhaps some more former teammates (though George Brett, who admitted he put off going to the bathroom to watch Bo hit, was tremendous) or a contemporary running back who marveled at Bo like the rest of us could have added more nuance.

And I disagree that he was a mythical figure in part because of a smaller media universe -- there was "SportsCenter'' to provide every amazing highlight no matter the season. The difference is that there was no Skip and Stephen A. to boil up some fake outrage the next morning. We saw what we needed and wanted to see with Bo -- the public trampling of Brian Bosworth on "Monday Night Football,'' the home run off Rick Reuschel in the '89 All-Star game -- without all of the ancillary noise.

But as I get older and farther away from Bo's late-'80s and early-'90s heyday as a sports and cultural icon, I've sometimes wondered whether the generations of sports fans that followed thought we were doing the "back in my day ...'' old guy's routine, that he couldn't have been the impossibly superheroic meteor we fans of a certain age reminisce about. You had to see Gale Sayers or Tony C. yourself, like your dad or granddad did, you know?

But he's one athlete whose highlights render hyperbole ineffective, and whether it was a former coach pointing out where he hit a home run that may or may not have ever landed, or footage of him running full speed up a wall while wearing spikes or leaving the Seattle Seahawks defense in his vapors, it was pleasant reaffirmation that Bo Jackson still resonates. Perhaps best of all is the coda at the end, when he hangs out in what he calls his man cave -- middle-aged Bo isn't above middle-aged-man jargon -- while carving arrows after growing bored watching football with his wife. There is no discernible regret that it ended so fast, no lament to be found. And you realize that Bo always knew and stayed true to the real Bo, even when the rest of us were reveling in the whirlwind.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Playing nine innings while waiting for the Dodgers to sign every remaining free agent ...

1. I'm surprised so many fans/readers/Twitter pals are incredulous about the money the Sox are paying to Shane Victorino, Mike Napoli, and Jonny Gomes. Again, don't sweat the few extra bucks on the average annual value they'll pay above the current perception of these guys' worth. It's not going to prevent them from doing anything else. The important part is the length of the deals; two or three-year contracts are fine for useful veterans who are here as that bridge to Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley, and the next generation of Red Sox.

2. To put it another way, there's serious revisionist history, amnesia, or hypocrisy going on here if you celebrated the extraction of the Carl Crawford, Adrian Gonzalez, and Josh Beckett contracts but are already annoyed that the perceived cash influx hasn't been used to make "a big splash'' yet, barely a week into December. Cherington is rebuilding this thing the prudent, smart way -- by bringing in dependable, well-regarded professionals on short terms without sacrificing a single draft pick or prospect. Good thing he has the patience that so many among us lack.

3. And to put it yet another way, the Red Sox' level of success next season is going to be dependent not on bringing in big-name free-agents, but by how well their holdovers who fell off or were injured last year recover toward a previous high level of play. If to varying degrees Jon Lester, Jacoby Ellsbury, Dustin Pedroia, Andrew Bailey and Clay Buchholz perform at somewhere near their previously established peak in 2013, the Red Sox will be better no matter how the likes of Victorino -- whose signing did catch me looking -- and Napoli fit in.

4.Koji Uehara's WHIP the past three seasons, beginning in 2010: .995, .723, .639. And his successive strikeout/9 rates, beginning the same year: 11.3, 11.8. 10.8. His career strikeout/walk ratio is 7.97/1. Even at age 37, he should be an outstanding fit, and for those who were looking for one, his willingness to join the Sox on a one-year deal offers another explanation for why Scott Atchison was non-tendered.

5. 5. Interesting that Terry Francona told reporters at the Winter Meetings that he thought the a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2008.shtml">2008 Red Sox, who lost to the Rays in seven games in the ALCS, was the best team he managed here. I don't see it. Oh, there was a lot to like -- Dustin Pedroia won the MVP, Kevin Youkilis had a huge year, Justin Masterson emerged in the bullpen, Daisuke Matsuzaka had that perfectly managed 18-3 season, Jason Bay was stellar in replacing Manny. But looking back, there were also real flaws. Tim Wakefield was second on the staff in innings. Papi hit .264. Julio Lugo was prominently involved for a while. Clay Buchholz and Josh Beckett were a combined 14-19. I can't imagine it's ahead of 2004, with the ferocious lineup, Curt Schilling and Pedro Martinez at the front of the staff and Keith Foulke in the ninth inning. And 2003 and 2007 might also rate higher. But Tito knows his reasons.

6. I'm beginning to suspect Daniel Nava, who was second among Red Sox regulars only to David Ortiz in on-base percentage (.352) last season, will end up as the lefthanded-hitting half of a platoon with Jonny Gomes in left field. I don't particularly like that idea -- Nava has no discernible skill beyond a decent ability to reach base -- but the switch-hitter does have a career .768 OPS against righthanded pitching vs. .621 against lefties.

7. So Eric Chavez's decision to sign a one-year deal with the Diamondbacks ruined my theory that the Yankees would sign him, Scott Rolen, and Kevin Youkilis to play 54 games apiece at third base in Alex Rodriguez's absence. It's nice to Chavez reestablished as a viable, relatively valuable big league player after his career was all but ended by back injuries, because in his youth he was building an interesting case as a future Hall of Fame candidate, averaging 29 homers and winning six straight Gold Gloves from 2001-06.

8. It'll be an interesting dynamic in the Yankees' clubhouse if Youkilis does accept their one-year, $12 million offer given his long history of ducking out of the way of Joba Chamberlain fastballs. Still, you have to figure their relationship would be no more awkward than A-Rod and Derek Jeter's.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

As I'm sure you've discovered on your own many times over, Google kindly informs you when searching for Reid Nichols that people also search for Dave Stapleton, Glenn Hoffman, Ed Jurak, Chico Walker, and Gary Allenson.

Yep, seems about right.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

At three years, I like it. At four years, maybe not so much. But the Red Sox got their target on their terms Monday, signing power-hitting Mike Napoli to a three-year, $39 million contract. Score one for Ben Cherington and the patient approach.

Napoli had reportedly wanted four years, and beyond shrugging and saying, "We gotta sign somebody,'' it would be difficult to justify that commitment to a 31-year-old catcher/first baseman coming off a season in which he battled a season-long quad injury and finished with a career-low batting average of .227.

But three years? If that's not perfect in regard to what the Red Sox need and where they are headed, it's a very reasonable compromise.

Even if Napoli duplicates his inconsistent '12 season, at the very least the Red Sox are getting a hitter who -- well, who provides multi-factorial value, as Cherington might say. Napoli offers positional versatility, works counts -- something, thank goodness, that is very clearly renewed as a priority -- and can be expected to hit between 20 and 30 homers, since he has done so in each of the past five seasons.

Last year, he still had an .812 OPS. That's .005 higher than Cody Ross's last season in what is perceived as an excellent year, and exactly the same as Adrian Gonzalez's in '12 with the Red Sox.

With the caveat that our stage here is Small-Sample-Size Theatre, maybe Napoli will be closer to the force he was just two seasons ago (1.046 OPS, 30 homers) now that he'll be playing half his games in a ballpark in which he has a career OPS of 1.107 with seven homers during 73 regular-season plate appearances. It's with only slight facetiousness that I suggest the Red Sox pitching staff will be improved for no other reason than they no longer have to deal with him -- in 145 plate appearances against the Red Sox, he has 15 homers and a 1.075 OPS.

This is not a case of Danny Cater Syndrome, of overvaluing and eventually acquiring a player because he has been relentlessly successful against your team -- in other words, if you can't get him out, well, heck, sign him.

It's pretty simple. They signed him because, out of the talent available on the free-agent market, he fits the best, in several ways.

He fits in terms of patience -- I know I said that a few paragraphs ago, but it can't be emphasized enough given that the Red Sox had five regulars with an on-base percentage of .325 or lower last season. Napoli's OBP fell 71 points last year, from .414 to .343 -- and that would have tied him with -- here's that name again -- Gonzalez for the fourth-best among Sox regulars last year.

He fits -- in a division that includes CC Sabathia, David Price, Matt Moore, Andy Pettitte, and Mark Buehrle, among others -- in his ability to mash lefthanded pitching. He has a .911 career OPS against lefties, and though his OPS strangely dropped to .706 last year (with a .179 batting average), chances are it's a coincidence similar to Cody Ross's nosedive against lefties in '11 before resuming his career-long habit of tormenting them when he joined this Sox last year.

He fits in the middle of the order of a lineup that didn't have a hitter with more than 25 homers last year. He fits at first base, a position at which the Red Sox don't have a more immediate prospect than Travis Shaw, who just arrived at Double A late last season.

And he fits -- for three years, not four -- as a proven, productive veteran who will help build that bridge to Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley Jr., and Will Middlebrooks in Cherington's oft-stated quest to build the "next great Red Sox team" without being locked into a contract that could in any way delay the reconstruction.

Signing useful players like Napoli and Jonny Gomes and David Ross to short-term deals is exactly how they should be proceeding given the state of the franchise, the limited star-power in the free agent market, and their ability, thanks in no small part to the Dodgers, to be able to spend a few extra million on a role player who fits their criteria.

So what's next? A trade for Justin Masterson? Swapping Jarrod Saltalamacchia -- the Red Sox' home run leader last season, which tells you all you need to know about last season -- for something presumably better than Brent Lillibridge and Zach Stewart? Something unforeseen? Or something huge -- maybe a reuniting of Rangers should Josh Hamilton's long-term contract demands shrink? (He wants nine years? Divide that by three and, yeah, there might be a conversation.)

While I'll listen for hints from the inside that the Red Sox will make a splash -- remember, Tom Werner foreshadowed the Carl Crawford deal weeks before it happened -- we'll enjoy the ripple of good news that arrived Monday. The most oft-rumored acquisition of the offseason is done. Mike Napoli is here, for three years, a patience approach by management securing the patient hitter the Red Sox need.

During our always chippy Friday chat, we discussed whether the Jon Lester/Wil Myers chatter made sense, lots of other trade possibilities, the rolling Patriots, and the usual media matters. Check in below to relive the fun.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Baseball Prospectus's ranking of the top Red Sox prospects will be revealed Thursday. Don't know about you, but I can't wait to see who is atop the list. It's going to be tough choosing between Xander Bogaerts and Wil Myers.

All right, so I'm being facetious, but man, isn't this just a rumor that kind of stops you in your tracks? According to Bob Dutton, the terrific baseball writer for the Kansas City Star, the Red Sox have discussed a trade with the Royals that would send enigmatic lefthander Jon Lester to Kansas City for superb 21-year-old outfield prospect Wil Myers, who hit 37 home runs between Double A and Triple A last season.

And as if an additional layer of intrigue were necessary, the division rival Rays have also spoken to the Royals about Myers, with workhorse righthander James Shields the possible bait. Writes Dutton:

Both deals have been discussed, but neither appears close at the moment. Other players could be involved, but the basic framework would be Myers for one of the two pitchers. At this point, all sides — the Royals, Rays and Red Sox — remain hesitant.

I'll get to the appeal of Myers in a minute, but first, here's a rough comparison of Lester and Shields:

Lester turns 29 in January, owns a 162-game average of 15 wins, 9 losses, 212 innings, and a 3.76 ERA over his seven seasons, has one year at $11.625 million remaining on his contract with a $13 million team option for '14, is coming off the worst season of his career (9-14, 4.82), and is lefthanded. His top career statistical comp is Chad Billingsley.

Shields turns 32 in December, owns a 162-game average of 14 wins, 11 losses, 227 innings, and a 3.89 ERA over his seven seasons, has one year at $9 million remaining on his contract with a $12 million team option for '14, is coming off the fourth-best year of his career (15-10, 3.52), and is righthanded. His top career statistical comp is Zack Greinke.

Pretty close, right? Age and being a lefty favor Lester. Pretty much everything else suggests Shields should be the slight priority, and no, I had no idea of his similarity to Greinke either.

Now, narrowing this to just the Red Sox and Royals, the hesitance from both sides is beyond understandable. If the Red Sox traded Lester to the team against which he has had arguably his defining career moment, a no-hitter in May 2008, that would strongly signal a few things:

1. That they don't entirely believe reuniting with John Farrell, who as the Red Sox pitching coach from 2007-10 helped Lester blossom into one of baseball's top lefthanders, is going to help him find his past form even while he's still in his presumed prime. Trading him might look like they're selling low, which is rarely a good idea. But if they think what they saw last year is representative of what he'll be going forward, they wouldn't be selling low at all. They'd be selling before his value shriveled even more.

2. That Ben Cherington is indeed open to making a franchise-altering transaction this offseason. Dealing Lester for Myers isn't quite equal to throwing nine figures at Josh Hamilton, but the long-term affect would be similarly earth-shaking. If you've been waiting for an indication that Cherington will do something big if it presents itself, this is it.

3. And perhaps most tellingly, that Cherington has full permission to remodel this franchise as he sees fit, even if it means sacrificing and ignoring the all-important sellout streak and NESN ratings and other ancillary noise. Because trading Lester, who despite his moodiness and the mess of a season he endured is still the best bet to be this team's No. 1 starter next season, for a wonderful prospect who is yet to dig into a big league batter's box for the first time, is as about as blunt a way as possible of confirming that, yes, the Red Sox are in full rebuilding/bridge mode.

That's not necessarily a negative development; even if the team struggles to get to .500 next season, they're assured of being more likeable and less pathetically melodramatic than the insufferable Bobby Valentine soap opera. As much as I've believed in Lester over the years and recognize that bad luck (.312 BABIP, 4.11 FIP) was a factor in his lousy season, my instant reaction was to do this trade.

What I don't understand, beyond the fact that the Royals have several talented cost-controlled young offensive players, is why the Royals would trade Myers for a pitcher who savvier teams would be trying to buy at a bargain rate after his miserable season. Especially since Lester -- and Shields, for that matter -- has at most two years left on his deal, while Myers would be under team control for six. Quality starting pitching remains at a premium -- that's why Anibal Sanchez can ask for $90 million with a reasonable hope of getting it. But Lester's level of quality going forward is no certain thing.

I just can't imagine the Royals ultimately pulling the trigger on this without a genuine prospect coming back in return. I know Kansas City's priority this offseason has been to add a top starter to the rotation. They've acquired Ervin Santana and re-signed Jeremy Guthrie ... so yeah, that vacancy remains unfulfilled.

But Myers is, by any measure and opinion, one of the premier prospects in baseball.

At midseason last year, ESPN's Keith Law ranked him as the fourth-best prospect in the minors, behind Texas's Jurickson Profar and the Orioles' Dylan Bundy and Manny Machado, writing:

He hits, hits for power, gets on base and probably ends up in right field but wouldn't kill the team in center. The Royals should have promoted him Sunday right after the Futures Game.

Myers never did come up last year, finishing his minor league season at .314 with those 37 homers. His bat is so far advanced that he was converted from catcher to the outfield two years ago to accelerate his arrival. I tend to think of him as a Dale Murphy-type for that reason, but the circumstances were different, and he's not the defensive whiz Murphy was in center.

Chris Mellen, who will write the aforementioned Red Sox prospects rankings for Baseball Prospectus, told me Myers profiles as a fine right fielder who will be an above-average regular on a contending club. I'm curious to see what he Pecota projections suggest this year; last year, before his huge breakthrough, they included Sixto Lezcano and Ron Fairly.

The Red Sox very likely won't be a contending club this year, especially if they do trade Lester. But Myers, a young, productive, elite prospect with mildly concerning contact issues (140 strikeouts last year) but superb on-base skills, would very likely be a middle-of-the-order cornerstone when they are a contending club again.

Even with the hovering mystery of why exactly the Royals would entertain trading such a prospect for a pitcher who has recently faltered -- is there something they know that we don't? -- put me down, with slight hesitation, as someone who hopes it happens. A future with Wil Myers, Xander Bogaerts, Jackie Bradley Jr., and Will Middlebrooks at the core of the Red Sox lineup sounds much more appealing than anything we saw last summer, and anything we're likely to see in the summer ahead.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

What was that goofy TBS slogan a few years ago that we were bludgeoned with seemingly every other pitch during the divisional baseball playoffs? "Characters welcome,'' right?

Must have been the year they were pushing Frank Caliendo as the next comedic genius. Or maybe it was reruns from when "The Office'' was watchable.

Anyway, I don't mean to digress right off the bat -- usually save that for later around here. It's just that that particular slogan, permanently seared into the back of my skull, has made its way back to the front of my mind recently. Naturally, it is again because of baseball.

It struck me last week as the Red Sox wrapped up their two-year deal with outfielder Jonny Gomes that "characters welcome'' applies to some meaningful degree to general manager Ben Cherington's approach to free agency this offseason.

That surprising but sensible signing followed reports, revealed by the player himself, that they were kicking the tires on Lance Berkman, the easy-going, accomplished 36-year-old outfielder/first baseman who was injured last year but is regarded as a terrific clubhouse presence.

But as we search for clues as to how Cherington will seek to repair the mess that this franchise has been for a season and a month, it's a grammatical variation on that slogan that seems to be an priority in team-restoration:

Character is welcome.

In fact, it's being emphasized.

Maybe David Ross, who signed a two-year, $6.2 million deal two weeks ago, didn't make much of an impression here during his eight at-bat cameo in 2008, but he certainly did during his four seasons with the Atlanta Braves. Here's what Braves beat writer David O'Brien of the Atlanta Journal Constitution wrote when the news broke that Ross was headed to Boston:

Ross was as strong a presence in the clubhouse as the Braves have had during the past several years, and his intangibles – working with young pitchers, accepting and thriving in a secondary role to a perennial All-Star like [Brian] McCann, always projecting optimism and good nature in the clubhouse – made him far more valuable than your typical backup catcher or bench player at any position.

Gomes also owns a reputation as a good teammate -- while he's been vilified here in the past for his free-swinging role in the Coco Crisp brawl in 2008, the perspective tends to change when someone is brawling for the players you're rooting for rather than the opponent. Susan Slusser, who covers the A's for the San Francisco Chronicle, tweeted this after Gomes joined the Red Sox:

No one can change a clubhouse culture like Jonny Gomes, as #Rays and #Athletics can attest.

What's happening is somewhat similar to Dan Duquette's approach following the pathetic 2001 season that was underminded by a toxic clubhouse that included an insufferable cross-section of gracelessly aging veterans (Dante Bichette, Mike Lansing) and awful personalities (Carl Everett, Jose Offerman, Shea Hillenbrand).

Duquette brought in character players such as Johnny Damon, Tony Clark (well, the intention was good), and Carlos Baerga, a bit player whose sunny disposition was essential in changing the culture. I trust you need no reminder how much of a factor it was in 2003 (when Kevin Millar arrived talking and never stopped) and with the recovery and redemption in 2004.

Given the melodrama that has engulfed this team since approximately September 1, 2011, the emphasis on character has to be deliberate, and it's one reason the possible return of cheerful Cody Ross can't be disregarded. Regarding players they're reportedly pursuing, I'm not sure how Mike Napoli, who has had his issues with Mike Scioscia and Ron Washington, would fit into this dialogue, and I suspect Nick Swisher's on-base percentage is similar to his usual percentage level of sincerity, but they're not bad guys, and they'd fulfill another requirement of this offseason: Bringing in quality ballplayers.

I've heard from a few fans who are antsy that there hasn't been a major move yet, particularly after the Jays' blockbuster. But if you step back and think about it -- consider the flawed players available in free agency, look at the terms of Joe Mauer's contract, remind yourself that giving out enormous long-term contracts to the likes of Carl Crawford is a big reason they're in this state in the first place -- you'll recognize that Cherington is playing this right.

This is what the Red Sox should be doing -- paying in the short term for players they want, even if it takes a few extra bucks. No, Gomes is not a $5 million a year player, but he has a discernible, valuable skill (he mashes lefties), it's a short deal, and the Sox have all that money to spend. There's nothing wrong with a slight overpay as long as the contract expires in a year or two.

There are other clues to Cherington's priorities, too. The Ross acquisition indicates a desire to improve the defensive performance behind the plate. The pursuit of Napoli and Swisher suggests there is value being put on positional and roster versatility, not to mention a renewed regard for taking pitches and working the more-than-occasional walk. Amen to all of that.

If these secondary moves are setting up something else bigger, well, that wouldn't surprise me either. If Josh Hamilton realizes that seven-year deal isn't happening, or Giancarlo Stanton demands a trade from the Marlin Remainders, at the least the Red Sox will be in position to be players. In the meantime, welcome the new characters, who should make this team better and are certain to make it more likable.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Playing nine innings while pausing to belatedly reflect upon Sunday's 15th anniversary of the Red Sox' franchise-altering trade of Carl Pavano to the Expos ...

1. A couple of weeks ago when I wrote my positional breakdowns for the Red Sox and how free agency may come into play, I mentioned in passing that Lance Berkman might be a good fit here. Full disclosure: That was on more of a whim based on my appreciation of him and his career than a belief he might actually be on the Red Sox' radar. So it was a pleasant surprise to hear that Ben Cherington has at least expressed some degree of interest in the 36-year-old former Astro, Cardinal, and Yankee. Perhaps if Berkman, who is just a year removed from a 31-homer, .959-OPS season, is brought in to get 450 plate appearances or so as a platoon first baseman and occasional left fielder while spelling David Ortiz (who is fifth on his career comp list) at designated hitter, he'd be a heck of a low-risk, high-reward pickup.

2. I believe the rumors that the Red Sox could be players for Josh Hamilton, but with a major caveat that didn't accompany said rumors: only if it's on a three-year deal or less, emphasis on less. There's no way they're locking him up long-term, and they shouldn't. He's a phenomenal talent, but he's on the wrong side of 30, injury- and bizarre-incident-prone, scouts suggest he's becoming more of a mistake hitter, and it's at least somewhat telling that the Rangers, who know the depth and details of his demons, seem willing to say goodbye. The Sox should remain patient, because while the sport is flush with cash, there will still be very good value to be found after the impending overpays for the likes of Anibal Sanchez and B.J. Upton. Perhaps Hamilton will realize the long-term deal isn't coming (though it probably will) and take a shorter, ridiculously lucrative one -- how does two years and $60 million sound? -- that rewards a team that waits.

3. I will wholeheartedly agree that the great Miguel Cabrera was the right choice ... for the Hank Aaron Award.

4. As for that other award, well, I think you know where I stand, and I'm not going to rehash every stubborn argument that grew tiresome 15 minutes after Cabrera was announced as the winner. I'd have voted for Mike Trout, and it would have been an easy choice, and maybe someday I'll even have a vote in such matters. Cabrera's Triple Crown is a wonderful and rare accomplishment, but those three statistics of varying importance -- as well as his other hitting feats -- don't trump all that Trout did offensively, defensively, and on the bases. Sean McAdam, Tim Britton, Dayn Perry, and Jonah Keri were among those who all wrote thoughtfully on the debate; meanwhile, Mitch Albom completed his metamorphosis into a best-selling troll. And the notion that the stats nerds lost because Trout was the analytical fan's choice is kind of backward. Beyond the praise he received for willingly moving to the third base (that's how you do it, Jeter), Cabrera's case was based solely on numbers. Meanwhile, it was the sabermetrically inclined among us who were considering defense and baserunning, two facets of the game that usually belong to the "I trust what my eyes tell me'' crowd. Ah, well. Fascinating players, fascinating argument.

5. Not sure what would have seemed more unlikely entering the season -- that no Red Sox players would receive a single vote in the Most Valuable Player balloting, or that Josh Reddick, a member of the submerged 2011 Red Sox who was dealt to the A's before the season, would finish 16th.

6. As a child of the '70s, I get the nostalgic reaction to the news that Hostess was going out of business (though that may not exactly be the case), though if everyone who lamented its demise actually ate a Twinkie the past 30 years, the company would be thriving. Personally, I think Hostess lost its way when it stopped printing baseball cards on the bottom of the boxes sometime around 1980 after doing so for most of the late '70s. As much as my 8-year-old self appreciated a Ring-Ding, those cards, which were probably made from many of the same delicious chemicals as the food products, were the reason their products ended up in the Finn household.

7. Have to admit, when I first heard the Blue Jays had hired (re-hired, actually) John Gibbons as their manager, I thought it was an uninspired choice, the culmination of an apparently uninspired managerial search that once listed ultimate retread Jim Tracy among the front-runners. Then I read this, and while I presume Shea Hillenbrand would disagree, it sounds like he's going to be the right fit in a lot of ways the second time around.

8. OK, so perhaps Carl Pavano wasn't the real ace in that trade referenced in the intro. The date -- November 18, 1997 -- Dan Duquette acquired Pedro Martinez from the Expos is a day thought should be celebrated each year, and it's appropriate it's right around Thanksgiving. I was mildly disappointed Trout didn't win the MVP, but I'll never be as ticked off as I was in '99 when Ivan Rodriguez edged Pedro because of the two disingenuous/dingbat writers who left him off the ballot.

9. As for today's Completely Random Baseball cards:

I suppose it's no surprise that there's never been a major league player whose last name was Stuffing. I did look. No Cranberry, either, and Onions belongs to Bill Raftery. All right, I'll stop. Happy Thanksgiving, everyone.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

You couldn't fault Ben Cherington if he stole a peek at his cellphone during a panel discussion Tuesday night with a couple of fellow general managers at UMass's Isenberg School of Management. Perhaps he even covertly slipped in a call or two himself during a lull in the conversation. The Florida Marlins, who gut their roster roughly as often as the NHL self-immolates in a labor war, were in everything-must-go mode again, and a Red Sox division rival had just filled up its shopping cart.

In this offseason's first true reminder that the hot stove league is as fun as the games themselves, the Marlins and Blue Jays pulled off a blockbuster that sent Josh Johnson, Jose Reyes, Mark Buehrle, Emilio Bonaf ... well, pretty much everyone worth a damn on the Florida roster other than Giancarlo Stanton, for a collection of legitimate prospects (Jake Marisnick, Justin Nicolino, and Adeiny Hechevarria), plus shortstop Yunel Escobar, pitcher Henderson Alvarez, and alleged catcher Jeff Mathis.

Some of the names in the deal didn't surprise Cherington -- he said at the event he'd discussed Johnson and Reyes with the Marlins -- but the magnitude of the transaction measured on the Richter Scale across baseball, and some Red Sox fans were quick to provide their own reactionary aftershocks, suggesting an opportunity was lost.

While the deal, at least on paper, makes the Red Sox' climb from the depths of the AL East more daunting at least in '13, any suggestion that Cherington should have trumped the Jays' offer is ill-conceived and reactionary. It's hard to resist envying a huge trade by a supposed rival, but taking on well-known, well-compensated players from the Marlins' 69-win team is not the way the Red Sox should approach revamping their 69-win team.

If the Red Sox, who begin what they hope will be an accelerated rebuilding with deep pockets and a deep farm system, want to see what else the Marlins might sell, here's an easy hypothetical that is probably pure fantasy, but one Cherington is required to look into nonetheless. He needs to call the Marlins and find out if Giancarlo Stanton can be had.

There is no logical reason why he would be available. If Bud Selig, on a whim/power trip, ordered an entire redrafting of the major leagues tomorrow, Stanton would arguably be the third pick behind the two newly crowned Rookies of the Year, Mike Trout and Bryce Harper. Stanton hit 37 homers last season and led the National League in slugging (.618). He is not eligible for free agency until 2017. And he just turned 23 last week. Players don't get much more appealing than that.

A reader asked this compelling question on Twitter Tuesday after the news of the blockbuster broke: Marlins call Sox & offer Stanton for Barnes, Bradley, & Webster. Cherington says...

Cherington says, "Hell, yes, and do not hang up that phone. I've just gotta clear it with ... [sigh] ... Larry."

Outfielder Jackie Bradley Jr. and pitchers Matt Barnes and Allen Webster are, respectively, the Nos. 2, 3, and 4 prospects in the Red Sox organization according to Baseball America. They are vital to the Red Sox' future, and for the dynamic Bradley in particular, the future could be sooner than we realize now. But Stanton is a special player, a franchise cornerstone who keeps getting better and whose peak may not be in sight, has hitters such as Frank Robinson, Eddie Mathews, Juan Gonzalez, Miguel Cabrera, and our own Tony Conigliaro on his age-22 comp list, and who is no more than seven months older than any of those three prospects.

I can't imagine they could trade for him without starting the offer for Xander Bogaerts, but they must find out. A player like Stanton, at his age and with his ability, should not be available. And perhaps he is not. Probably he is not. But who knows what the Marlins are capable of right now. Stanton is furious, and if that leads to a trade demand, at the very least Cherington should be on Line 1.

The Red Sox have never replaced Manny Ramirez. They must find out if this is their chance.

Regarding the megatrade that actually did happen, there are two crucial questions as I see it regarding the Red Sox, and neither relates to whether they should have made the trade: How does the trade affect them and how should it affect them.

First, the former. It certainly makes their challenge of rising from depths of the AL East in 2013 more daunting. While everyone in the division has a glaring flaw -- the Yankees are aging, the Orioles don't have much of a rotation or an encouraging run-differential, the Rays too often hit like the '75 California Angels -- the Blue Jays have at the very least fortified their roster with proven talent, particularly Johnson, who is entering his second year after Tommy John surgery and is a legitimate ace when healthy.

Bonafacio is fast and versatile, an asset to be sure. What Buehrle and Reyes will give them is less certain -- the former is a well-compensated, fast-working innings eater at this point, while as Cliff Corcoran points out, Reyes and Escobar are much closer in value than the perception.

The Blue Jays have a lot of ifs among their holdovers -- if Jose Bautista comes back healthy, if Ricky Romero bounces back from elbow surgery and a horrible season, if Edwin Encarnacion can do it again, if Colby Rasmus and Brett Lawrie play to their ability -- and what becomes of the team in '13 depends more on them than the newcomers. But at the least, there's enough talent and depth that whoever happens to be the new manager will be stepping in to a great situation. Bobby Valentine could probably get 80 wins out of this roster.

And as for how the trade should affect the Red Sox, well, the answer is simple: It shouldn't. Signing the underrated David Ross last week was a sign that the Red Sox intend to make well-considered if perhaps not flashy moves, which is exactly how they should be proceeding this offseason. If a chance to make a reasonable trade for the likes of Andre Ethier or Alex Gordon presents itself, certainly it's worth investigating, at least until Bogaerts's name comes up. (I'm convinced he plays meaningful innings for the Red Sox this season.)

And of course that call on Stanton must be made, and made again, and once more after that, just in case. But if there's no chance to trade for a player who is roughly the same age as the Red Sox' best Double A prospects and 14 months younger than Will Middlebrooks, you stay patient with the prospects you have, and keep building the right way. After all, if history is a guide, Stanton should be in the midst of his prime right around the next time the Marlins have a fire sale.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Consider it a public-service announcement, consider a plea for common sense in this crucial winter for the Boston Red Sox, but however you consider it, I just ask that you do:

Please stop pining for certain Red Sox exes who were fine players here, moved on, lost much of their ability/appeal, and are now available to come back.

If you're not among those who have suggested through various mediums -- Twitter, chat, AIM, beeper, AOL email account, uninspiring sports radio program, whatever -- that the Red Sox should pursue Kevin Youkilis and Jason Bay this offseason, I applaud you for having the wisdom to recognize that the two once-excellent, now-fading or fully faded hitters are no solution at this point. Or at least for being too lazy to contact me to suggest it.

They are not the answers to any question but this one: "Name two former Boston players the Red Sox should not acquire this offseason. Whoa, not so fast there on David Ross.''

I do understand to some degree why a Boston sequel for Youkilis and, to a lesser degree, Bay, would appeal to Red Sox fans. Both were here -- and essential here -- when things were good. After the miserable season the Red Sox just endured, following up a miserable September 2011, baseball may have lost you, and it's tempting to look to better days for a solution.

But this is not in the same ballpark as lamenting that Adrian Beltre was only here for a year, nor is it the same thing as the inevitable why-can't-we-get-players-like-that cliches if/when Carl Crawford or Adrian Gonzalez thrive in Los Angeles. All evidence suggests that the Red Sox parted with Youkilis and Bay at the appropriate times.

In parting, Youkilis became somewhat of a sympathetic figure because of the nonsense he had to endure from Bobby Valentine, but the truth is much colder than any warm sentiments he may have left behind after eight-plus seasons, two World Championships, two top-six finishes in the American League Most Valuable Player balloting, and countless slammed batting helmets. He'll be 34 in March, hasn't played more than 136 games since 2008, and is coming off far and away the worst season of his career, hitting .235 with 19 homers between Boston and Chicago. In a free-agent market that offers slim pickings at the corner infield positions, he's liable to get paid for what he's been in the past rather than what he will be going forward. The Red Sox will not be the ones who pay for a front-row seat to his inevitable injury-plagued decline.

The desire to bring back Bay on anything other than a non-roster invitee to spring training is more mystifying. Sure, he was a dependable, productive, easy-to-like player during his season-and-half in Boston (2008-09). Coming over from the Pirates in the 2008 trading deadline blockbuster that ended the Manny Ramirez era in Boston, he won us over immediately with his easygoing personality, tales of growing up as perhaps the only kid in the history of Trail, British Columbia who had a Carl Yastrzemski poster on his bedroom wall, and instant production, which provided a reasonable replica of what Manny might have done without any of the melodrama. He was a stable, core player on a pair of playoff teams, and the Red Sox lineup sure could use someone like the guy who hit 36 homers with a .921 OPS in '09.

But anyone who has paid attention to all that has befallen Bay since he signed a four-year, $65 million deal with the Mets before the 2010 season knows this: he is not that guy anymore.

It's terrible what happened to Bay in New York, a pair of concussions and myriad other injuries robbing him of much of his timing, talent, and confidence. But it cannot be exaggerated that for whatever justifiable reasons there were for his downfall, he will be remembered as one of the worst free-agent signings in baseball history.

In three seasons and 1,125 plate appearances as a Met, he went .234/.318/.369 with a .687 OPS and 26 homers -- or 10 fewer than he had in his final season in Boston. He bottomed out last season with a .165 batting average and a .536 OPS. That OPS was nearly 100 points lower than Jim Rice's in 1989, the permanent barometer in Boston for what a worn-out left fielder looks like.

Again: It's terrible what happened to Bay in New York, but it happened, and it was so bad that the Mets, who aren't so much a baseball franchise as a financial cautionary tale, granted him unrestricted free agency last week by agreeing to pay the remaining $21 million on his contract.

He's trying to reclaim his baseball life. So are the Red Sox in a sense. But a reconciliation at Fenway Park isn't the way for either of them to do it.

Ben Cherington and the Red Sox must be more creative in rebuilding this thing than essentially hopping in the DeLorean and bringing back Bay and Youk as medium-reward lottery tickets. Signing a lesser-known former Red Sox player, Ross, who played eight games here in '08, is a start.

He's a tremendous defensive catcher with a little bit of pop who thrives at all of the complex and subtle aspects the position that seem to elude Jarrod Saltalamacchia. He gives them flexibility on the field and in terms of depth to make a trade. It's the kind of understated but intelligent deal the Red Sox need to continue to move forward and get out this malaise. Bringing back faded stars will only prolong it.

During our always unstoppable Friday chat, we discussed the Red Sox' free-agency options (kinda wish they'd get in on Greinke), why the Celtics' slow start is nothing to worry about, the Patriots' post-bye matchup with the Bills, and the usual media matters. Check in below to relive the fun.

Last in a four-part series looking at the Red Sox positional groups and possible solutions via free-agency. Part 1 on outfielders can be found here. Part 2 on the infield and catchers is here. Part 3 on the starting rotation is here. Today, the bullpen.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

It makes sense to begin at the end, because other than the ongoing question of whether Daniel Bard is reparable or destined to be a cautionary tale, the most relevant question concerning the Red Sox' relatively deep and versatile bullpen is whether Andrew Bailey is the solution at closer.

His numbers during his three full seasons with the Oakland A's suggest that the answer is in the affirmative. From 2009-11, he saved 75 games with a 2.07 ERA, winning the AL Rookie of the Year award and posting numbers uncannily similar to the early work of the closer he would be called upon to replace in Boston, Jonathan Papelbon.

But to say it did not go well last year, that first season with the Red Sox, would be an understatement. He suffered a fluke thumb injury in spring training that kept him out until August. When he did return, he was ineffective, pitching to a 7.04 ERA in 15.1 innings. It did not help matters that the player the Red Sox gave up acquire him, Josh Reddick, hit 32 homers and won a Gold Glove as a driving force for the surprising playoff-bound A's.

This is deal that requires more than one year of consideration before conclusions are drawn, and not just because Reddick hit .215 in the second half. But no matter what happens going forward, Bailey will never be the most useless player with that surname to play for the Red Sox, it was a pretty miserable indoctrination to Boston for a pitcher who had found success easy to come by before coming here.

It's hard to believe the Red Sox would move away from Bailey as the closer after that one hard-luck, miserable aberration of a season, but there were reports that suggested he was nearly the compensation sent to the Jays for John Farrell. If his star has fallen that far within the organization -- and again, I'm skeptical -- it will be interesting to see what the Red Sox do to solve their issues in the ninth inning.

It's generally foolish to make a long-term commitment to any free-agent closer, and Junichi Tazawa, who with his increased velocity post-Tommy John surgery was a delightful revelation last season (1.43 ERA, 45 Ks and just 5 walks in 44 innings), is probably better suited establishing himself as the eighth-inning go-to pitcher when there's a lead for now.

This much we do know for now: If Bailey can be the pitcher he was in Oakland, all of the pieces should fall into place in the innings ahead of him without much of a foray into free agency. Let's take a look.

WILD CARDS
What can you say about Daniel Bard that wasn't already said during his season-long meltdown after he was converted from lights-out reliever to ill-equipped starter? He's broken, and it was awful to watch, and the greatest of the many challenges John Farrell and Juan Nieves face is trying to salvage him.

Well, I think we now know why the Yankees were so quick to get rid of Alfredo Aceves despite his successful track record. He's an extremely effective pitcher when he's not doing things that make you suspect he's insubordinate. If Farrell thinks he can get through to him, keep him, but if he gives any indication about dissatisfaction with his role, get him gone. The Red Sox don't need anymore recurring migraines.

He was excellent in 2011 for the Astros, atrocious in April 2012 for the Red Sox (five homers in two innings), excellent in Pawtucket in May and June, atrocious for the Red Sox in July and August, and excellent in September (0.90 ERA in eight appearances. No, Can you tell I have no idea what to expect from Mark Melancon in 2013?

THREE LEFTHANDED DUDES WHO SHOULD
PROVIDE BULLPEN FLEXIBILITY
Until last season, Andrew Miller was the epitome of the unfulfilled eternal prospect, a lefthanded, hard-throwing former first-round pick who kept getting chances for those reasons even though his performance was rarely encouraging. That is, until last year, the 27-year-old's seventh partial big-league season and first as a full-time reliever. Miller emerged as one of the Red Sox' most dependable relievers, making 53 appearances and striking out 51 in 40.1 innings. He's never going to be the star he was projected to be when chosen a pick ahead of Clayton Kershaw in the 2006 draft, but he has finally found his niche.

Health has been a recurring issue for Rich Hill -- in two-plus seasons with the Sox, the Milton native has pitched a total of 31.2 innings over 40 games while missing nearly a full season after Tommy John surgery. But when he's available, he's effective -- he has a 1.14 ERA in those 40 appearances.

Veteran Craig Breslow is arbitration-eligible, but he should be back. He was a model of consistency in two stops last year (2.70 ERA, 1.17 WHIP for Arizona, 2.70 ERA, 1.15 WHIP for Boston) and is also effective against righthanded hitters, who had a .683 OPS against him last year.

A TRIO OF CRAFTY VETERANS
Vicente Padilla is a free agent, but he was a relatively effective workhorse, and unless he decides to retire or go star in a sequel to "Machete'' or something, there are worse ideas than bringing him back.

Journeyman Scott Atchison is also arbitration-eligible, but for the first time in his career the 36-year-old will enter spring training with a secure major league job after posting a 1.58 ERA in 42 appearances last year.

With a time-altering changeup, Clayton Mortensen's repertoire is actually underpowering, if that's even a word, but he was quietly effective last season, striking out 41 in 42 innings with a 1.21 WHIP. He did give up seven homers, but at the least he's proof that the Red Sox got something for Marco Scutaro.

FOUR RIGHTHANDED DUDES WHO WILL
KNOW PAWTUCKET WELL NEXT SUMMER
Chris Carpenter can dial it up to the high 90s on the radar gun, but he's got a long way to go before he can shake the label as The Other Chris Carpenter, or worse, That's All We Got For Theo. David Carpenter, acquired as extra cargo in the Farrell/Mike Aviles swap, was going to be DFA'd by Toronto, has a career 5.70 ERA, and probably isn't even good for a decent rendition with Chris Carpenter of "We've Only Just Begun.'' Sandy Rosario has a 3.26 WHIP -- yes, not ERA, WHIP -- in 10 big-league games over three seasons. Zach Stewart was essentially the Red Sox' way of telling the White Sox, "Ah, what the hell, take Youkilis for nothin'.''

THE YANKEES ANGLE
I'm including Mariano Rivera out of proper respect and nothing more, for while the Yankees legend is technically a free agent, there's a better chance of him actually being bionic (a long-held suspicion at this address) or returning to his previous career as a khakis model than there is of him pitching for a team other than the Yankees. I hope he makes it back, because he's one player who deserves to go out on his own terms.

The Red Sox should not and probably will not pursue the closer who filled in for Rivera last year after his injury. Rafael Soriano is a fine closer (42 saves, 2.26 ERA last year), but he's 33 and looking for a long-term deal. Even if the Sox don't believe in Bailey, they'd be better pursuing a potential bargain such as Joakim Soria -- the former Royals closer whom the Yankees reportedly covet -- for the back end of the bullpen rather than giving three years to Soriano or someone of that ilk. Have we learned nothing from the Rays?

POTENTIAL BARGAINS
The Red Sox had interest in Ryan Madson as a closer last winter, but he signed with the Reds and promptly blew out his elbow. He's a terrific low-risk, high-reward option. A pair of former Rangers, control artist Koji Uehara and former Padre Mike Adams, may warrant a kicking of the tires, and considering the good fortune the Red Sox have had with relief pitchers who came over from Japan (Hideki Okajima, and now Tazawa), it makes sense that Kyuji Fujikawa, a 32-year-old lefty who had a 1.32 ERA for the Hanshin Tigers last year, could draw serious interest.

BEST-CASE SCENARIO
Bailey pitches like he did from 2009-11 in Oakland, Tazawa is as effective in meaningful games as he was when all was lost last year, Miller continues to live up to his talent, and Farrell repairs Bard.

WORST-CASE SCENARIO THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE BARD BEANING WALLY THE GREEN MONSTER
Bailey gets some weird injury yet again, Bard continues down the Ankiel/Blass path, last year's overachievers (Atchison, Mortensen, and Padilla if he returns) falter and no one picks up the slack.

LIKELIEST SCENARIO
Bailey reemerges as a dependable if less-than-durable closer, Tazawa settles in as an effective righthanded setup man, and the pieces fall into place in the middle innings for what should be a deep, dependable bullpen.

Third in a four-part series looking at the Red Sox positional groups and possible solutions via free-agency. Part 1 on outfielders can be found here. Part 2 on the infield and catchers is here. Today, starting pitchers.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Let's jump right in to the recurring Relevant Holdovers segment of this project since, save for perhaps Dustin Pedroia and Jacoby Ellsbury, the Red Sox don't have two players more relevant than Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz when determining how far the franchise will come in 2013 in its recovery from 2012.

It's quite simple: If new manager John Farrell, who during his four-year stint as the Red Sox pitching coach (2007-10) oversaw Lester and Buchholz's development into top-of-the-rotation starting pitchers, can coax production out of the stained duo in the vicinity of the 36 wins they totaled during his final season here, the Red Sox will win more than they lose and be in the hunt for that second wild card at the very least.

In fact, it wouldn't be silly to presume that a significant reason Farrell is now the Red Sox manager is that reasonable hope that he can remedy whatever it is -- indifference, conditioning, or a mere mechanical issue or two -- that is at the center of Lester's regression from one of the top starting pitchers in baseball to a surly, puzzling mediocrity who is too easily rattled by one bad call.

The task with Buchholz is easier -- keep him healthy and keep him focused, and he should be fine and finally consistent as a No. 2 starter. His admitted "fear" of Farrell bodes well, he had stretches of true dominance last summer, and he seems to have grown up. And let's not forget John Lackey, though some of you surely have tried. For as effortlessly annoying as he can be, he was pitching hurt in 2011, when he had a ridiculous 6.41 ERA in 160 innings, and probably for a good part of 2010. Healthy, he should finally be an asset.

But it's imperative that Lester, who in many ways embodies this team's decline on the field and in terms of perception since September 2011, finds his way out this weird malaise. Because if Lester, a remarkable 75-31 in his career before September 2011, doesn't get it together and rediscover all that he used to be, it's that much more difficult for the franchise to do the same.

INTRIGUING LEFTIES
Felix Doubront's breakthrough (11 wins, 167 strikeouts in 161 innings, 4.37 FIP compared to a 4.89 ERA) was one of few pleasant surprises last season, but as encouraging as that strikeout rate is, his accomplishments were exaggerated by the every-fifth-day slugs surrounding him in that rotation.

I do like Doubront, but I wouldn't be stunned if Franklin Morales is better this season. He'll be 27 in January, was so highly regarded not that long ago that Baseball America ranked him the eighth-best prospect in baseball before the 2008 season, struck out 76 batters in 76.1 innings, and has overcome the control issues that led to him falling out of favor in Colorado. From 2008-10, his best walk rate with the Rockies was 5.2 per nine innings. He was down to 3.5 last year. Recognizing his potential as a starter is one thing Bobby Valentine did right.

IRRELEVANT FACTS ABOUT PEDRO BEATO
Pedro Beato has made 84 starts in the minors, none in 71 appearances in the majors. And that concludes our Irrelevant Facts About Pedro Beato segment of the program for today.

RATED ROOKIES
I strongly suspected, given their waiver claim of him during the Dodgers blockbuster, that the Blue Jays would demand Rubby de la Rosa as compensation for John Farrell. Baseball America projects him as the Red Sox' future closer, but I'm including him among starters because 10 of his 14 MLB appearances have been in that role. (He went 4-5 with a 3.71 ERA in 60.2 innings in 2011, which means he's not technically a rookie.) It probably goes without saying, but that's never stopped me before: He's a much more valuable piece given the Red Sox' current state than Mike Aviles.

UConn product Matt Barnes, their third-ranked prospect, hasn't thrown a pitch at the Double A level yet, while the other promising pitcher acquired from the Dodgers, Allen Webster, is yet to pitch in Triple A. For now, they're for future consideration.

ANGELS ANGLES
Yeah, I know the Red Sox won't pursue Zack Greinke, their recent mistakes with massive contracts making them particularly gun-shy about laying out a nine-figure deal for anyone who isn't a perfect fit in every way. Greinke's battles with anxiety and depression are well-known, and his habitual bluntness would probably find him in the middle of too many silly controversies here. Though I have little doubt that with continued good physical health he will remain a very successful pitcher no matter where he goes -- and he has Allard Baird in the Red Sox front office to vouch for who he really is -- the atmosphere probably wouldn't be ideal. And that kind of stinks, because he is exactly what the Red Sox need, a durable, genuine, super-competitive No. 1 starter who would allow Lester and Buchholz to slot in rotation spots that they are probably more suited for.

I understand why the Red Sox won't pursue him. Their high-stakes gambling days are over for now. But even with whatever questions there are about how Greinke would respond to an overbearing media market and the huge sticker price, I have to admit I wish they would. Greinke is a hell of a pitcher and a fascinating person. The Red Sox are short on both.

Dan Haren's career numbers through age 31 are almost identical to those of Jake Peavy. Peavy, coming off his first season of more than 19 starts since 2008, just signed a two-year, $29 million deal to remain with the White Sox. Haren, who has a bad back but who has been remarkably durable for the most part over his nine-year career, could probably be had for much less. There is risk, but the potential reward is worth taking the chance.

PERSONS OF INTEREST
One reason to believe the Red Sox will find a quality No. 3 starter in this year's free agent pool is that there are a lot of quality No. 3 starters (or better) in this year's free agent pool.

Haren, who is a borderline ace at his best, is my preference, though I understand the risk. In my ongoing plea for a big-league reunion of the stacked 2005 Portland Sea Dogs, I'd be fully on board with the signing of Anibal Sanchez, who has pitched between 195 and 196.1 innings each of the past three seasons, has legitimate strikeout stuff (he whiffed 9.3 per nine innings in 2011), and was sensational for the Tigers in September (2.43 ERA, 37 Ks in 40.2 innings) and in the postseason (1.77 ERA, 18 Ks in 20.1 innings). Of course, those are all reasons why he's likely to get bigger money or a longer deal elsewhere.

Maybe you'd prefer Ben Cherington pursue groundball-machine Hiroki Kuroda more aggressively this offseason than he did last year, when he ended up being a one-year bargain for the Yankees (16 wins, 3.32 ERA).

Another pitcher the Red Sox were lukewarm in pursuing last winter is back on the market, though Edwin Jackson, who had a 98 ERA+ in 189.2 innings with the Nationals, is probably more of a No. 4 starter. Brandon McCarthy, who has a 3.29 ERA in two seasons in Oakland, might have been the first choice here, but considering the life-threatening ordeal he went through after being hit in the head with a line drive late in the season, there has to be at least a small concern whether he will be the same pitcher.

Which one they ultimately sign -- and there will be one -- may come down to who is attainable for the most reasonable terms and length of contract. One they shouldn't pursue: 34-year-old Kyle Lohse, who went 16-3 with a 2.89 ERA in his second straight strong season. His top two career comps are Bronson Arroyo and Brad Penny, and he strikes me as one of those Cardinal redemption projects (apparently that knack carries over to the Mike Matheny era) who thrive only in that environment.

Ryan Dempster, Shaun Marcum, and to a lesser degree the talented, wildly inconsistent Francisco Liriano could be on their radar. Marcum, who has a 3.89 career ERA in nine games at Fenway, is already drawing interest from the Cubs, who seem to have developed a habit of being interested in the same players as the Red Sox.

BEST-CASE SCENARIO WITHIN REASON:
The return of Farrell and the addition of a pitching coach who actually talks to the manager -- whether it's "Ricky" Peterson, Juan Nieves or someone else -- sparks Lester and Buchholz to become co-aces, John Lackey wins 14 games, neither Morales nor Doubront regresses, and Haren signs on and duplicates his 2010 season (16-10, 3.17 in 238.1 innings).

WORST-CASE SCENARIO Farrell can't prevent Lester and Lackey from taking Buchholz hostage and going on a midseason tri-state beer-and-chicken rampage, Doubront regresses, free agency yields little help, Aaron Cook gets signed out of desperation and makes 18 starts again, Daisuke Matsuzaka signs with the Yankees and finally unveils the gyroball.

LIKELIEST SCENARIO
Buchholz gives them 170 innings at a 3.70 ERA, Lester wins 15 games with an ERA in the neighborhood of 4.00, a healthy Lackey gives them roughly what he gave the Angels in 2009 (11 wins, 3.83 ERA), Doubront regresses slightly, and Haren battles back issues but gives them 30 starts at a slightly-better-than-league-average performance. It's the rotation of an 85-win team.

Second in a four-part series looking at the Red Sox positional groups and possible solutions via free-agency. Today, infielders and catchers.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

The first thing you notice in attempting to evaluate the state of the Red Sox infield (catcher included) is how great it was just recently.

In 2010, the much-derided bridge year that wasn't so bad in retrospect, Victor Martinez hit 20 homers with a .844 OPS, Kevin Youkilis (19 homers, .975 OPS), and Dustin Pedroia (.288, 12 homers in just 75 games) excelled before injuries abbreviated their seasons, Adrian Beltre (28 homers, .919 OPS) was a beast, and Marco Scutaro was nothing if not dependable (11 homers, .275).

In 2011, Adrian Gonzalez had a phenomenal first half and a rather productive year overall (.338, 117 RBIs, .975 OPS) for someone who supposedly couldn't handle this market. (Man, I detest that narrative so much.) Pedroia hit a career-high 21 homers and finished ninth in the MVP balloting in his age-27 season, Youkilis had 19 homers and a 122 OPS+ in 120 games, and Scutaro did his Scutaro things, including an amazing September (.387/.438/.581) amid the soul-crushing chaos of the collapse.

But now? Well, hey, at least there's Pedroia. And Will Middlebrooks, a potential cornerstone presuming he learns to lay off that pesky slider in the dirt. But Gonzalez, Youkilis, and Scutaro all were traded away under various strange circumstances, and save for some flickers of hope from Pedro Ciriaco, there wasn't much to watch a season ago. It's sort of amazing how little star power the Red Sox have now.

The Red Sox have a glaring hole at first base and in the middle of their lineup, and as frustrating as he could be, Gonzalez will be missed, because there isn't anything close to a suitable long-term replacement available via free agency this season. There are, however, some names who may not belong in lights, but who if utilized properly could help this team's recovery in 2013.

Let's consider the infield, while shoehorning in the catchers, too ...

RELEVANT HOLDOVERS
He's unorthodox and undersized. He plays extremely hard, and because of that, he's endured more than his share of serious injuries. If you want to trade Dustin Pedroia because you're worried injuries will take a rapid toll like they did on Kevin Youkilis and you don't believe he'll be close to the same player three years from now that he was three years ago, I can respect that. I don't agree with it, but I respect it. But if you want to trade him because you think his attitude was part of the problem in 2012, you could not be more misguided.

I'm mildly concerned about Will Middlebrooks's on-base skills (13 walks, 70 Ks in the majors), but at the very least he should be a dependable regular for the next half-dozen years or so. And with just a little patience, he could be much, much more. Had he stayed healthy, I wonder how he would have slotted on the list of third baseman who had monster full seasons at age 23, among them Troy Glaus (47 homers), Ryan Braun (33), Evan Longoria (33), Eric Chavez (32), Miguel Cabrera (26), David Wright (26), and Jim Thome (20).

SOMEWHAT LESS-RELEVANT HOLDOVERS
Jarrod Saltalamacchia will be 28 years old in May, and after several stops and starts early in his career, we finally know what he is as he settles into his prime years -- an adequate defensive catcher whose game-calling is a matter of debate, a provider of legitimate power (25 homers last year), and a strikeout machine prone to long slumps in which you'll wonder if he'll ever make solid contact again. The flaws are major, but they can win with him.

Because they are both large, righthanded-hitting, defensively challenged catchers, there's an easy and frequent comparison between Ryan Lavarnway and Mike Napoli. But it should be acknowledged that it took Napoli some time to establish himself ... and yet Lavarnway is behind his pace. At age 24, Napoli hit .228 (but with an .815 OPS) and 16 homers in 325 plate appearances for the Angels. Last season was Lavarnway's age-24 season, and it was considerably less successful -- in 166 plate appearance for the Sox, he hit .157 with a .459 OPS. I'm not saying there's little reason for hope -- in 2011 he 34 homers over three levels beginning in Double A -- but this is going to be a huge year in ultimately determining whether he'll become a big league regular.

He tormented the Yankees, and he brought an element of speed and hustle to a season that plodded to an ugly end. I understand why there's a perception that Pedro Ciriaco is the solution to something; he was much more fun to watch than so many dismal nothings that populated the Red Sox roster last season, a small oasis in Bobby Valentine's man-made desert. He gave a damn, and I'd like him to be part of something better, too. But the reality is that Ciriaco is a 27-year-old, good-field, erratic-armed infielder on his third organization who, for all of his enthusiasm, finished with a .315 on-base percentage and a .705 OPS. His .352 batting average on balls in play is unsustainable, and he fell off the edge of the earth in September (.560 OPS in 111 plate appearances). He has a chance as a utility guy, but to project him as anything more than that is to ignore that he looked better than he was because he was the rare fun player in a miserable season.

IF YOU CAN'T PITCH TO HIM, SIGN HIM
Yeah, that's sort of the opposite to "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" right there. As a general rule, signing a player in part because he pummels your team is a foolish way to go about things; better scouting, pitch execution, or even the occasional intentional walk are better courses of action. If killing the Red Sox meant you got a contract with the Red Sox, Frank Catalanotto would have a lifetime deal. But we can say this about Mike Napoli, the slugging catcher formerly of the Angels and most recently with the Rangers who seems to be on most Red Sox fans' shopping lists: the perception that he punishes Boston pitching is not exaggerated. In 38 regular-season games against the Red Sox, he has hit 15 homers with a 1.075 OPS. At Fenway, he's hit seven homers in 19 games with a 1.107 OPS. There's risk involved -- his OPS fell nearly 200 points last year in roughly the same amount of playing time -- but he's an appealing option as a platoon first baseman and occasional catcher.

RATED ROOKIES
In 2004, 20-year-old Hanley Ramirez arrived in Double A late in the season and made an impression that paralleled the perception that he was one of baseball's best prospects, hitting .310/.360/.512 with five homers in 32 games. Last season, Xander Bogaerts arrived in Portland at age 19 and lived up to his billing as the Red Sox' best prospect since Ramirez, hitting .326/.351/.598 with five homers in 23 games. He's not quite as flashy, but he's similarly talented and a hell of a lot more mature. He'll begin the season in Portland. I would not be surprised at all if he spends a good chunk of it in Boston.

The glove is truly spectacular, but Jose Iglesias is going to have to add about 100 points to that .135 career batting average to justify his place in the lineup. Looks like he will get a crack at proving he can be the starting shortstop.

SHOULD I STAY OR SHOULD I GO?
The question pertains to James Loney, the 28-year-old first baseman with lethargic .336 slugging percentage in 434 plate appearances between Los Angeles and Boston. And the answer is: Go to wherever your feeble bat takes you -- we hear Tokyo can be fun -- and don't look back.

If during one of his unique brainstorms Bud Selig decided the gap between Triple A and the majors is just too vast (it's not, but bear with me) or just wanted to pay homage to Pat Dodson by implementing a Quadruple A level, Danny Valencia, Mauro Gomez and Ivan DeJesus would be the first three players the Red Sox assigned to their new affiliate. Pat Dodson, Mike Rochford, and Sam Bowen will be there to greet them upon arrival.

DON'T BELIEVE IN YESTERDAY
Some Red Sox fans -- a sizable enough number that it's noticeable, anyway -- have this weird habit of pining for the return of former players whose best days at Fenway are behind them. Kevin Youkilis was a wonderful hitter from 2007-10, and his was part of some great times here. But his decline, largely due to injuries, was evident last season, and he wasn't much better in Chicago after he was traded in June, hitting .235 overall with 19 homers. He hasn't played more than 122 games in any of the past three seasons, he'll be 34 in March, and he's probably not going to be rejuvenated, here or elsewhere.

It was a heck of a postseason for Marco Scutaro, who was as phenomenal with the Giants as he was atrocious with the Rockies. There's a good job waiting for the 37-year-old second baseman somewhere -- probably back in San Francisco -- but it won't and shouldn't be here.

If you see Adam LaRoche Tuesday, wish him a happy 33d birthday. Then tell him it's purely coincidental that the three-year deal you were thinking the Red Sox should offer him as recently as Monday has been cut to two. A return to the Red Sox, for whom he had all of 19 at-bats in 2009, is appealing on the team's terms. LaRoche had a career-best 33 homers last year and plays a swell first base, but he strikes out a ton and has old player's skills. The Nationals are holding steady on going beyond two years, and the Red Sox should too. Unless, I suppose, the only alternative is Casey Kotchman.

OTHER PERSONS OF INTEREST
He's on record with his dislike of the American League, and whatever skills he has left are probably redundant with Papi's. No, I guess I'm not exactly making the case for bringing Lance Berkman to Boston on an incentive-laden deal, but I suspect one of the most underrated hitters of his generation can still get it done at the plate if he chooses to play a 15th season. Ah, you got me. I just want him here because I like him. He's no solution to anything at this point.

Stephen Drew, anyone? C'mon, don't hold his family history here against him (and J.D. wasn't so bad, you know -- deep down, you do know). Hold his recent injury history (165 games played the past two years) and his .657 OPS last season against him.

Jeff Keppinger was sort of the Rays' understudy to Ben Zobrist the past couple of seasons, a good offensive player (though not Zobrist-good) who can play multiple positions. He'll have some appeal for his bat (he hit .325 and whiffed just 31 times in 418 plate appearances), but he's subpar defensively, and the fit probably isn't right in Boston right now with Ciriaco apparently getting a shot at being a super-utility player.

BEST-CASE SCENARIO WITHIN REASON
Pedroia stays healthy and does his usual thing, Iglesias hits enough to justify his spot in the lineup, Middlebrooks mashes, Napoli signs and finds his 2011 30-homer form, and Bogaerts tears through the high minors and provides reinforcement in August.

WORST-CASE SCENARIO
Eh, after an entire season that was a worst-case scenario, I'm taking a mulligan here, though I suppose it would include another Pedroia injury and the signing of Loney to a major-league contract.

LIKELIEST SCENARIO
The best-case scenario, minus the part about Iglesias hitting. There's no evidence he can even hit like Brendan Ryan (.244 career average) at this point.

First in a four-part series looking at the Red Sox positional groups and possible solutions via free agency. Today, we'll lead off with outfielders.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

During my weekly chat at this address, there's one recurring lately question that I generally dodge because I just don't have the answer. (No, it's not "why are your hair, shirt and skin the same color?")

It's this:

What will the Red Sox' lineup look like on Opening Day?

There are few certainties, that's for sure. Dustin Pedroia will be at second base, his uniform dirty by the end of the flyover. Will Middlebrooks will be at third. David Ortiz is back for an 11th season and, barring catastrophe, a 12th in a deal that is good for him, the franchise, the fans, and the lineup.

And provided he doesn't literally run into Adrian Beltre during the offseason, Jacoby Ellsbury should be in center field in the final year of his deal.

But even Ellsbury's return isn't a sure thing, and beyond the aforementioned names, the lineup is dotted with question mark after question mark.

Does Jose Iglesias, with the golden glove and noodle bat, get the first shot at shortstop? Who are the corner outfielders? And what about first base?

The offseason is always complex -- Theo Epstein used to say there was a Plan A, Plan B, and Plan C for everything, all interdependent on other moves -- and circumstances have made it extraordinarily challenging for his successor, Ben Cherington. The Red Sox, coming off a 93-loss season in which three presumably core players -- Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, and Josh Beckett -- were sent to the Dodgers in an unprecedented opportunity to reset the payroll and the roster.

Now Cherington has millions to spend, should he so choose, in a free-agent class that has decent depth but no franchise-changing superstars other than Josh Hamilton, a risk the Red Sox are unlikely to take.

(Cherington has the pieces to make trades to fill in the roster voids, but that's a topic for another day over the hot stove. Hey, it's a long offseason.)

Today, let's begin our four-part look at the state of the Red Sox roster -- incumbents, placeholders and prospects alike -- and ways it can be amended and mended by free agency. We'll start with the outfielders.

RELEVANT HOLDOVERS
Jacoby Ellsbury is the biggest wild card on the Red Sox roster. So much depends on what they do with him, and if he sticks around, what he is as a player. Ben Cherington should shop him this offseason with free agency a year away, but how does he judge what equal value is at this point? Ellsbury has had two seasons ruined by blunt-force injury sandwiched around a sensational 2011 in which he was the best offensive player in the league and hit brilliantly down the stretch as the season was caving in around him. Unless they get a bushel of quality prospects or a player who is equal to a healthy Ellsbury in value, I hope they keep him around, bat him third, and benefit in the present from his plans for the future.

Given that he's played just 93 games over the past two seasons, it's would be foolish to expect Ryan Kalish to fill a significant role early in the season. The best hope is that he gets healthy, shakes off the rust, and reminds us over the summer why the Red Sox -- and most of us -- liked him better than Josh Reddick as a long-term prospect.

The feel-good story of 2010 had an unexpected prologue that was a blast for a while, but Daniel Nava will be 30 on Opening Day and hit .188 with a .607 OPS in the second half. The Red Sox need to do better. He's improved his defense to adequate, and his respectable on-base skills should give him a chance, ideally, to continue his major-league career as a bench player in the National League.

Ryan Sweeney is the current example of the Brad Komminsk rule --looking the part doesn't mean you can play it. He's a decent fifth outfielder, eminently replaceable.

RATED ROOKIES
In 1977, Pedro Guererro hit .403 with a 1.077 OPS in 144 plate appearances, one of seven players with at least as many trips to the plate to hit over .300. In 1979, Mickey Hatcher hit .371 in .440 plate appearances. In 1981, Mike Marshall hit .373 with 34 homers and 137 RBIs in 541 PAs, and the next year he hit .388 before sticking with the Dodgers. In 1985, Sid Bream hit .370 in 333 PAs. In 1987, Jeff Hamilton hit .360. Billy Ashley slugged 37 homers, batted .345, and put up an 1.129 OPS in 1994.

I mention all of this for two reasons:

1) It's always fun to look up the monster numbers players both great and something considerably less than great put up in Albuquerque over the years.

2) Jerry Sands had two terrific seasons there, but I'm going to trust the assessments that suggest he'll be a role player rather than a star before I'll ever trust those numbers.

The Red Sox do have two potential regulars arriving soon, but the question is whether Jackie Bradley Jr. and Bryce Brentz will be factors this year. Brentz is a strong-armed power-hitting right fielder who should see Boston at some point in 2013. Bradley is the better prospect, ranked second to Xander Bogaerts in the Red Sox organization by Baseball America, but he has just 229 at-bats at the Double A level. He's a potential Gold Glove center fielder with tremendous on-base skills, and his charisma and personality will make him an instant fan-favorite in Boston. He's Ellsbury's eventual replacement in center, and the hunch here is that his path is similar to the incumbent's, with a late-summer call-up a possibility if he can avoid any potholes between Portland and Pawtucket. He did slump late last season in Portland, but still finished with a .371 on-base percentage.

SHOULD I STAY OR SHOULD I GO?
I'll stick with my standard line on Cody Ross: He's just good enough that you're always casting an eye around for someone slightly better. He's a nice guy who had a nice season for the Sox -- 22 homers overall, a .921 OPS at Fenway, and a 1.010 OPS in 150 plate appearances against lefties. But he's also a bit overrated because he's one of the few Red Sox who was fun to watch and productive during a miserable season. Mark Bellhorn had a higher OPS in 2004 (.817) than Ross did last season (.807). His OPS was .684 on the road, and he had a .729 OPS against righthanded pitching. The Red Sox should draw the line at two years.

* * *
HIGH-RISK, HIGH-REWARD
Hypothetical: It's a slow winter's day on 4 Yawkey Way. You're Ben Cherington, killing time between phone calls by playing the NBA2K13 Celtics in franchise mode on Carmine. Suddenly, the phone rings. It's Michael Moye, Josh Hamilton's agent. After expressing surprise that Scott Boras isn't Hamilton's agent since it just seems natural, you ask Moye what he wants. He tells you: Josh wants to play in Boston. He feels bad for what Bobby V hath wrought or something like that. All it'll take $90 million over three years. You drop the phone. What do you say when you pick it up? No, thanks. Too risky. Right? Right?

There are rumors that B.J. Upton could get in the vicinity of $100 million. He has that kind of talent, but to call him lackadaisical at times would be to insult those who really are lackadaisical, and it's telling that even Joe Maddon struggled to get through to him. He's a smart kid and won't be 28 until August, but the price tag is way too high for what he has been.

All we really know about Melky Cabrera is that he's lousy at starting up a website. Is he the All-Star who had a .906 OPS for the Giants before his PED suspension, or is the guy who rarely looked like a major leaguer (.671 OPS) two years ago for the Braves?

OTHER PERSONS OF INTEREST
Nick Swisher is such a ham he makes Kevin Millar look cameraphobic, and there has to be a reason why the Yankees have seemingly little interest in bringing him back (though they did make him a qualifying offer). But he gets on base consistently (at least during the regular season), has hit between 21 and 35 homers in each of his eight seasons, and offers positional flexibility. If the Sox could get him for, say, four years and $60 million, he'd probably be worth putting up with.

Angel Pagan is a solid all-around player who had a sneaky-good year for the Giants, and he can bond with Jacoby Ellsbury over the awesome feeling of winning the entire country a free taco.

I'm sure David Ortiz would love a reunion with his 1997 New Britain Rock Cats teammate, but Torii Hunter has had his issues with Boston, and I bet he ends up with their rival in New York.

Ryan Ludwick is poor man's Cody Ross. The real Cody Ross is marginal enough.

After doing so with Michael Bourn's childhood friend Carl Crawford, they won't be overpaying another player on the wrong side of 30 who is speed-dependent.

***

BEST-CASE SCENARIO WITHIN REASON
BECAUSE HAMILTON ISN'T HAPPENING
Ellsbury stays healthy and re-emerges as an MVP candidate, Ross returns and platoons with Kalish, Brentz and/or Bradley provide late-season reinforcements, and Swisher signs at a reasonable rate if a quality young outfielder can't be acquired via trade. If you have a better solution than Swisher, I'd love to hear it.

WORST-CASE SCENARIO
Ellsbury gets hurt, Kalish gets hurt, Nava gets 450 at-bats, and Swisher signs a nine-figure deal that includes his own block of programming on NESN.

LIKELIEST SCENARIO
You know, I think the best-case scenario actually is fairly likely. Let's go with it.

Catchers and infielders coming tomorrow.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

If you're a Red Sox fan, Tuesday was about fresh starts and finding those long-lost reasons for optimism. And so I think we'd all agree that the occasion of introducing the 46th manager in franchise history should not turn into a referendum on whether epic, inexcusable, look-at-me disaster is too delicate a way to describe the 45th manager.

So let's keep it to this: After hearing John Farrell speak for roughly a half-hour at his introductory press conference at Fenway Park, you're not only reassured that the manager Ben Cherington wanted all along is the right choice to pull this team out of its malaise, but you cannot help but be reminded of just how wrong Larry Lucchino (I'm presuming he was hiding behind the black curtain today) got it 11 months ago.

There was no mention of a synergistic NESN program or a weekly radio appearance in New York or ballroom dancing trophies or whether Huffy or Schwinn offers a better pair of wheels for the price. There was no wide-eyed, blisteringly white-toothed insincerity, no anecdotes that may or may not have survived the inquiry of a fact-checker.

There was simply Farrell, with his decade-long friend and new boss Cherington to his right, commanding the room with candor, insight, and no-nonsense sincerity, attributes that will serve him well in commanding the clubhouse. There were the usual awkward attempts at humor ("Put this on your big melon,'' Cherington said as he handed him a Red Sox cap), and the not-so-subtle wardrobe choices (blue shirt, red tie) that reflect the colors of the team and, in good times, the region. That presence that intimidated Clay Buchholz and kept Josh Beckett in line during Farrell's four seasons here as pitching coach was relentlessly apparent.

He offered recurring terms ("hit the ground running'' was a particular Farrell favorite, and yes, Cherington did manage to avoid saying "multifactorial'' this time around) and casual baseball insights (the 1988 Cleveland team he played on had six future managers, including Farrell and Terry Francona). There were acknowledgements of his failures, his awareness of what he did wrong being the surest sign that he will learn from his mistakes.

It wasn't just a reintroduction, but a reiteration of what he stands for as a baseball man. He suggested the team would be aggressive on the mound and on the basepaths, thanked the Blue Jays for letting him pursue his dream job, and made sure to praise the backup candidates such as Brad Ausmus. All in all, the whole thing was reassuring enough that skeptics of Farrell's record in Toronto (154-170 in two seasons) have to now suspect that the failings weren't so much his as they were the result of myriad issues, some beyond his control. (Yes, Ben, OK -- they were multifactorial.)

I'll admit it: It was more impressive than even those of us already convinced of his rightness for the job expected.

Another quick confession: My pregame thought when I was assigned to write this reaction to Farrell's introduction was to parse his quotes, sorting out what he said from what he really meant. There's always some decoding required in these situations, you know?

Except that in this case, there really wasn't. Not today, and not with Farrell and Cherington, whose bond surely has something to do with their no-nonsense personalities. I don't think Farrell could have been more forthcoming, whether he was being justifiably challenged by a Toronto reporter on whether "he skipped town'' on the Jays, or answering a query about what he saw going wrong with the Red Sox from the opposite dugout the past two years.

Rather than trying to figure out what he was really trying to say -- a habit developed here over the past year while trying to solve the perpetual Bobby Valentine riddle or make sense of the latest Lucchino missive -- I found myself simply listening to what he was saying. While I'm a bit wary of his suggestion that they'll be aggressive on the basepaths -- please, please, please don't waste outs on early-inning bunts and reckless stolen base attempts -- the majority of Farrell's answers served the same purpose: They convinced you that someone very competent and copacetic with the front office is now in charge, that the dark days dating back to September 2011 will give way to sunlight come February in Fort Myers.

He was convincing in saying that he'll be able to work with and even repair players who succeeded while he was here and floundered since he left, specifically Jon Lester and Daniel Bard. But he also said he's not taking his previous relationships for granted.

"I believe there's an amount of professionalism that every player who comes to the big leagues and certainly the Red Sox would have," said Farrell. "That guides their preparation, their motivation.

"I will work my butt off to earn their trust, earn their respect, and create an environment in that clubhouse that is a trusting one, a learning one, a competitive one, and hopefully, a very successful one at the same time. If that's being described as a players' manager, then maybe that's what I am."

He emphasized that he will hold the players accountable, and that once his coaching staff is assembled, it will imperative that they work as a unit, with one voice. In other words, he's not going to test out the Valentine method of giving the pitching coach the silent treatment.

"I can't speak to what the clubhouse was like last year,'' he said when asked if he was familiar with the "toxic" atmosphere. "I think it's important that we communicate consistently with the players, that we outline expectations, and we have to hold players accountable to what we're trying to get done. That's leading people. At the same time, they have to have a voice in this, to give their input.

"It's got to be a positive place that they want to come to every single day.''

Farrell didn't shy away from retrospection, offering specifics about what he could have done differently to improve the Blue Jays during his two seasons.

"I think there might have been opportunities to speak more passionately about some suggestions or recommendations to the roster,'' Farrell said. ''We also introduced and brought in a number of young players and created a diverse offense that was aggressive. We looked to incorporate a much more aggressive running game, and some of that was overboard. We ran into some outs.

"So, creating that environment and that approach and putting young players into it, there were probably opportunities where I should have shut them down in terms of the X's and O's of the game. And maybe I would have changed closers a little bit quicker.''

They are lessons he brings with him to Boston, a place with considerably more pressure than Toronto. Historically a baseball-mad city, it has just been mad about baseball for more than a year now. Farrell said he welcomes the pressure of getting this thing right.

"I think that's one of the drawing cards to this position,'' Farrell said. "I played in the American League my entire career, coming through and experiencing it at field level and on the mound here. Having been in the dugout for four years and being part of a World Series championship team, this is arguably the best place in this game. If there hadn't been recent challenges, I probably wouldn't be sitting here.

"There are a lot of things that make it a natural fit. Now, by no means is it a given to have success. We've got a lot of work to do. But I'm confident in Ben's abilities to bring in the right players and put together a roster that will compete for a World Series.''

It was one more great answer from Farrell, the new-yet-familiar manager who right now, five-plus months before Opening Day, sure does seem like a great answer himself.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

It took two managerial searches and one massive embarrassment of a season, but the Red Sox finally have the manager they wanted pretty much since the best one they ever had was gracelessly dismissed an October ago. Ben Cherington will almost certainly say it sometime around noon on Tuesday, and I'm comfortable saying it in the hours before he is formally introduced: John Farrell is the right man at the right time for this job.

Yet judging by the feedback at this address, there's a strong sentiment that someone other than Farrell should have been hired. That's no surprise. In a poll during my Friday chat -- the day before the news broke that the job was Farrell's -- 58 percent of readers said former catcher Brad Ausmus should be the choice. Farrell, who spent the past two seasons as the Blue Jays manager after four as the Red Sox pitching coach, was the runner-up with just 20 percent of the vote.

I agree that there's little doubt that more evidence must be gathered and further deliberations are necessary regarding Farrell's ability and approach as a big-league manager. Toronto was an injury-plagued mess this season, and perfectly mediocre in 2011 at 81-81. But it seems to me the primary reason fans preferred Ausmus, or favored DeMarlo Hale, Tim Wallach, or Tony Pena, was one that was misguided if understandable after enduring this season's 93-loss debacle.

They need a fresh start, not more of the same.

If more of the same means bringing back underachieving players or Dr. Charles Steinberg-crafted, transparent, spin-controlling memos on Larry Lucchino's letterhead, I wholeheartedly agree that a fresh start is required there. More talent and transparency would go a long way to winning back the fans who were absent during so many "sellouts" in August and September. Heck, in June and July, even.

But if more of the same is a reference to Farrell being linked to all that has gone wrong recently with this organization, well, that doesn't really make any sense. At all. There's a warp in your timeline somewhere. Farrell was here when the Red Sox were a model franchise. The Red Sox won the World Series in his first year as pitching coach, were a win from the World Series in his second, made the playoffs in his third, and "endured'' and 89-win bridge year in which championship aspirations might have been fulfilled had Kevin Youkilis, Dustin Pedroia, and Jacoby Ellsbury not suffered major injuries.

I'll take more of that same, thanks. So should you.

I have little doubt that Ausmus is going to make the first general manager to hire him look prescient, and I'm glad the Red Sox interviewed him in case the Farrell compensation could not be worked out. (If you think giving up Mike Aviles, who for a true contender wouldn't be anything more than a valuable bench player, was too much, I have to assume you didn't want Farrell under any circumstances. This is hardly the equivalent of giving up Manny Sanguillen for Chuck Tanner.)

But Farrell brings at least two attributes to the job that no other candidate could. First and foremost, he has a history of success with players who have faltered since he left for Toronto. If he can't help Daniel Bard find his missing velocity and Clay Buchholz discover the consistency of his superb 2010 season and Jon Lester to get in shape and stop worrying about ancillary nonsense, then it's probably time to move on from them. He's succeeded where Curt Young and Bob McClure and Randy Niemann have failed. If Farrell can't aid or salvage these guys, no one can.

The other known attribute that is unique to him is that he knows what he's getting into, the dynamics of the entire situation, at least in relation to what a true outsider would know. He knows the vast majority of the personnel, whether that's the players, the front office, or even the Liverpool branch of ownership. He knows the expectations of the fans and the exaggerated importance of NESN in-house. And yet he's not stained by September 2011 like DeMarlo Hale might be.

By hiring a new manager they already know well, the Red Sox are miles ahead of the game compared to where they were last year, when they were still interviewing the likes of Dale Sveum in November and didn't hire Bobby Valentine until the end of the month.

Which, from what I gather, didn't work out quite so well.

Farrell's detractors will remind you that it didn't go quite so well for him in Toronto, either. There was the Yunel Escobar embarrassment on top of less shameful suggestions that the Jays were a sloppy, undisciplined team. (Descriptions of Brett Lawrie's recklessness on the bases should give Red Sox fans Mike Greenwell flashbacks -- I believe his philosophy was "run until they tag you, son.") The team was 16 games below .500 overall during his two seasons, and I imagine we'll hear more whispers about what went wrong in the coming days. Rumor has it he was terrible at coaching the power play.

I'm presuming Cherington listened to and investigated the pros and cons of Farrell's time in Toronto, but ultimately, his personal experience working with him for four years and knowing him for much longer than that should trump any second-hand information from afar.

Besides, it's not as if he's going to be worse than his predecessor, a disaster against which all others will be measured. The Red Sox could name Matt Patricia manager and Josh Boyer pitching coach and it wouldn't be a bigger mess than Valentine's career-killing one-and-done.

We'll find out soon enough what Farrell's habits are tactically, but presuming he doesn't have a recurring habit of bunting with his No. 3 hitter in the fourth inning of a tie game, his task really isn't so difficult.

He knows the city, he knows the media, he knows the passion of the fans, and he knows the Red Sox. There will be no surprises in getting acclimated. If he is upfront with the players and makes them accountable without feeding them to the media first, if he treats them like adults unless they prove they don't deserve to be treated that way, if he puts together a lineup based on logic rather than look-at-me hunches, and if he works wonders with the pitching like he did when he was here before and asks himself "What would Bobby do?" and does the opposite with everything else, I'm betting he'll win over his skeptics, one victory at a time.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

They're doing it right this time, I think.

I mean, no, I guess I wouldn't entirely put it past Larry Lucchino to decide he knows just the disciplinarian manager the Red Sox need, prompting him to dig out a Ouiji board to summon the ghost of Billy Martin while Tom Werner immediately green-lights "Billy From Beyond" for NESN.

Barring a late stampeding of the process by his misguided bosses, it appears as though Ben Cherington will hire the man destined to be The Red Sox' Best Manager Since Terry Francona, Which Kind of Goes Without Saying, Right? from an interesting, appealing list of candidates.

If Brad Ausmus is the choice, well, great. He's bright, was known to be tough and a good communicator as a player, and is open-minded toward sabermetrics while also valuing the game's human element. Tim Wallach's personality and approach draw comparisons to that of his former teammate Francona, and that's a good thing. The former big leaguer Dave Gallagher, whose opinion I greatly respect, raves about DeMarlo Hale, whose chance is already overdue. Tony Pena would bring energy and experience, though his old-school, hunches-and-instincts style probably leaves him as one of the runners-up. They don't need another Grady Little.

Of that crew, I lean toward Ausmus. But I still think that if the choice truly is Cherington's, that choice will be John Farrell, and provided the Blue Jays don't demand every prospect whose last name begins with the letter B as compensation, he should be the choice.

The decision between Farrell and Ausmus, if it does come to that, would be similar to the one Theo Epstein faced nine years ago, when he chose Francona (the experienced manager who failed elsewhere) over an intriguing but less-experienced candidate (I know I'm not the only one who wonders how different Red Sox history would be, for better or worse, had they hired Joe Maddon then).

While the details of Farrell's two seasons, 154 wins, 170 losses, and sporadic personnel brushfires in Toronto absolutely should be investigated thoroughly before he is hired, it does surprise me how quick some are around here to dismiss him as a viable first-rate candidate based primarily on his uninspiring record in Toronto. The Blue Jays won 81 games in Farrell's first season. The Phillies never won more than 77 from 1997 to 2000 -- Francona's four seasons in charge. Unless a team is very lucky, like the 2012 Orioles with their negative run-differential, or managed by an overmatched, out-of-touch, passive-aggressive narcissist (hint: the person I have in mind possibly left town via bicycle), generally a team will play to its talent level. That happened to Francona in Philly, and it's happening to Farrell in Toronto.

It can be a blessing to hire a manager who has made -- and learned from -- his mistakes elsewhere, whether that's picking the right moment to call a player out for dogging it or letting an honest mistake slide, or navigating the complex situational aspects of managing that were such a strong suit for Francona during most of his 7 1/2 years here.

That experience -- even with the blemishes -- makes Farrell a better managerial candidate now than when Toronto hired him, and even then he was the presumed heir to Francona here. I'm convinced he took the Blue Jays job only because he thought Francona would be in Boston as long as he wished.

Better yet, they know him, probably better than they do in Toronto. Farrell was here for four seasons as the pitching coach, succeeding in a job he'd never held before, though he was a talented pitcher before injuries derailed his career. He oversaw Clay Buchholz's development, coerced an 18-3 season out of Daisuke Matsuzaka, helped Jon Lester become one of the top pitcher in the American League, and kept Josh Beckett away from the Miller Lite and the Nutty Bars. There were pitchers who didn't succeed on his watch, Brad Penny and John Smoltz and so on, but overall he worked in sync with Francona and was damn good at his job ... a job, by the way, for which he was overqualified.

Before he came to the Red Sox from Cleveland before the 2006 season, he was on the fast track to becoming a general manager. He was the Indians' director of player development from 2001 to 2006, a period in which the franchise was twice named organization of the year by USA Today Sports Weekly and was named the best farm system by Baseball America in 2003.

Mark Shapiro, then the Indians' general manager, said this when Farrell left for Boston in October 2006. "He's an impact guy, a very special, unique guy because of his communication skills, presence, experience, and skill set. He's had an impact on every guy in the organization."

It did not take him long to make that impact in Boston. When the Pirates inquired about him as a potential managerial candidate just a year later, after the Red Sox had won their second championship in four years, owner John Henry sounded resigned to letting Farrell go:

"He has meant so much to this franchise and to the success of this organization. He's just stepped in in his first season and really helped our pitchers achieve their goals. He's a great communicator and teacher, and losing John would be very tough for us."

If Farrell is Cherington's top choice -- and the relative quietness surrounding his candidacy could be interpreted as a confirmation or, I suppose, a clue that the Jays' ransom is too high -- the Red Sox will be getting more than a manager.

They'll be hiring back someone who already made a great impression here, just as the Indians tried to do in October 2009 when Shapiro pursued him as the manager. "No one is better than John at confronting a problem head-on," Theo Epstein said at the time. Sound like someone who would fit here now?

They'll get a well-rounded baseball man who is already copacetic with the Red Sox' approach.

They'll get someone who has succeeded with pitchers who mostly have failed miserably since September 2011.

They'll get someone they know, and who knows them for what they were and should be, not what they've been for the past season and a month.

If Brad Ausmus is the choice, you'll get no beef here. But to me, he's Plan B, the backup catcher. The Red Sox' first choice shouldn't be the candidate who probably will succeed here. It should be the one who already has.

@GlobeChadFinn

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

It's kind of amazing how a prolonged stretch of staggering, unforeseen misery -- last September straight on through this one, really -- alters a Red Sox fan's perspective. In 2010, the Red Sox won 89 games, would have won the second wild card by a game over the Chicago White Sox had Bud Selig's novelty existed then, and gave us such daily joys as watching Adrian Beltre swing for the fences from one knee, play a spectacular third base, and damn near kill Victor Martinez every time he was within striking distance of a head-rub.

That wasn't a championship team -- the title that year went to an affable dude named Cody Ross and the Giants -- but in retrospect and by current standards, it was a really fun team, and one that may have been able to do some damage in October had Dustin Pedroia, Jacoby Ellsbury, and Kevin Youkilis not been limited to a combined 195 games.

Yet as that season wound to its conclusion, there was one often misconstrued and misinterpreted phrase with which it was often associated, usually by someone caterwauling on the radio:

Bridge year.

While then-general manager Theo Epstein said it in reference to the gap before the arrival of the next group of core prospects, it was twisted into almost a concession or confession that that particular team wasn't constructed with the intent of winning a championship. It became a punchline. That wasn't fair or right, though in retrospect the bridge year didn't exactly end up being what Epstein intended, either, with two of those prospects -- Casey Kelly and Anthony Rizzo -- getting dealt for the established Adrian Gonzalez, lottery tickets cashed in for a perceived sure thing.

I bring all of this up not only because I'll take any excuse I can to write about Beltre, even briefly, but because a true bridge year, and perhaps another beyond 2013, is ahead for the Red Sox. For those who don't know what the term really means, you're about to find out.

Ben Cherington, provided he is allowed to do his job with minimum interference from Branch Rickey Lucchino, has an extraordinarily complex and busy offseason ahead, and the importance of what's to come between now and the February day when pitchers and catchers report to Ft. Myers cannot be overstated.

He must find a manager, and upgrading there is an absolute certainty provided he doesn't accidentally hire a guy who hunts hobos for sport or something. He needs to fill out a roster that has far less star power than we are used to around here, and he needs to do it in an offseason in which the two most talented free agents -- Josh Hamilton and Zack Greinke -- have red flags that strongly suggest this may not be the best destination for them. He needs to make a difficult decision on David Ortiz, try to entice Cody Ross to stay without overpaying him, and hit the jackpot in mid-level free agency just has the Sox did nearly a decade ago with Ortiz, Bill Mueller, Kevin Millar, Mike Timlin, Todd Walker and more.

And he must make sure that bridge is stable when the next generation of Red Sox core players -- starting with Xander Bogaerts and Jackie Bradley Jr., two extraordinarily likable but still developing young players -- arrive on Yawkey Way, perhaps late next season and then for good in 2014.

To paraphrase the Ron Washington character in "Moneyball," it's going to be incredibly hard. There can be no mulligans for Cherington this offseason, but it's at least encouraging that the process -- I believe he would call it "multifactorial'' -- is off to a good start. Bobby Valentine, who was the worst managerial match for a particular roster and situation that I can recall save for Joe Kerrigan '01 -- has ridden his Huffy off into the sunset, and the early stages of the search for their third manager in three years suggest this hire could be as good as the last one was bad.

John Farrell's excellent track record in Boston and Cleveland, not to mention his familiarity with the Red Sox' on-field and front-office personnel, makes him a very appealing choice if the compensation is right. (I say give 'em Chris Carpenter and call it a Farrell-for-Theo Epstein swap.) Yes, he's had hiccups in Toronto, but he's bright enough to learn from those mistakes, just as a certain Red Sox manager did during his four-year apprenticeship in Philadelphia in which he never won more than 77 games. Farrell left only because it looked like Terry Francona would be here as long as he wished. He was the presumed successor. Here's hoping he's now the successor, one horrible year removed.

If compensation can't be agreed upon with Toronto, it appears the Red Sox have other appealing options. Brad Ausmus has been touted as a future manager pretty much since he broke in with the Yankees, and Francona's friend and former Expos teammate Tim Wallach also strikes you as someone who will do well with a team of his own someday. The notion that there are no game-changers in this batch of candidates is incorrect; we just don't know who the next great manager is yet. Who would have known that Joe Maddon would be all that he is when he was the runner-up to Francona here after the 2003 season?

As important as it is to find the right manager -- hell, just a competent manager -- this time around, roster-building is where the general manager will and should be judged. It's imperative this offseason that Cherington has both luck and a high batting average on trades, because he had neither in his first season as general manager.

I'm not ready to announce a verdict on the Josh Reddick/Andrew Bailey deal with Oakland -- Reddick hit .215 in the second half, and the first three years of Bailey's career were very similar to Jonathan Papelbon's -- but the Jed Lowrie/Mark Melancon swap with Houston is a flop, and that's with the knowledge that Lowrie is made of fine porcelain. Ross was a tremendous signing, and Cherington must replicate it many times over this offseason, whether he's targeting Mike Napoli, B.J. Upton, rising-stock Anibal Sanchez, disgraced Melky Cabrera, Adam LaRoche, Jake Peavy, or even a couple of replacement-level, Quadruple A, Brian Daubach-types whom the scouting department recognizes as potential keepers if given a chance.

This is a big-market rebuild that the Red Sox are undergoing, and they have the resources to make significant deals if Cherington can find the right ones. The Dodgers trade left the Red Sox with appealing depth in the farm system, and that coupled with their ability to take on salary makes it a real possibility that megadeal could occur, whether it's for Arizona's Justin Upton, the Padres' Chase Headley (c'mon, don't be gun-shy about those San Diego sluggers), or yes, even something for Seattle ace Felix Hernandez. The Mariners have said repeatedly he's unavailable, but with 1,600 innings on his arm at a young age, two years and $39.5 million left on his deal, and not a whole lot surrounding him on that roster, maybe he shouldn't be. They'd be foolish not to look around and see whether someone is willing to pay the price for a true ace. The Sox should not part with both Bogaerts and Bradley for him, but if Will Middlebrooks is the centerpiece, it would at least be worth discussing, wouldn't it?

Perhaps more than anything else, the Red Sox need their proven star-quality players to return to their pre-2012 form. Jacoby Ellsbury was the best offensive player in the American League two years ago and finished second in the MVP voting then, seven spots ahead of teammate Dustin Pedroia. While Ellsbury will surely be shopped this offseason, I'd prefer retaining him with the hopes that he has a huge contract year rather than trading a dollar for three quarters. He did have a legitimate injury this season, and Pedroia took his lumps on the field and off as well. They need to be among the league's elite again, as does Jon Lester, who went from having the highest winning percentage among active pitchers to winning six fewer games than Barry Zito. And while Clay Buchholz had his moments of dominance, the health and consistency of his great 2010 season eluded him.

Hey, last season, pretty much everything eluded the Red Sox -- luck, health, timely hitting, quality starting pitching, and on and on. They're due for a few breaks next season, and should Cherington hit a few home runs himself this offseason, perhaps the bridge will lead them to contention before we expect it, just as it did for the Orioles and A's this year. I'm not saying I'm expecting it. I'm just looking forward to the day, whenever it arrives, when the bridge's end is on the horizon and the regular season is finally more fun and interesting again than the offseason.

@GlobeChadFinn

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

FOXBOROUGH -- Stevan Ridley's professional football career is still young, a mere 21 games after the Patriots' 31-21 victory over the Denver Broncos Sunday. But already he's acquainted with the disappointment of fumbling away an opportunity.

Here's hoping Ridley's familiar mistake Sunday isn't foreshadowing that it's about to happen again.

As a rookie a year ago, Ridley emerged as one of the more intriguing young players on a roster dotted with first- and second-year promise, running for 97 yards on 10 carries against the Raiders in his fourth professional game and closing out the regular season with three straight strong performances in which he totaled 210 yards on 39 carries. But in the finale against the Bills, he fumbled the football out of bounds, and two weeks later in the Patriots' AFC Division Round matchup with the Broncos, he coughed up the football with 8:46 remaining in the third quarter and the Patriots ahead, 42-7.

That was the last time Ridley carried the ball as a rookie. He was inactive for the AFC Championship Game victory over Baltimore, and dressed but did not play in the Super Bowl against the Giants.

With hindsight, wondering whether Ridley might have been able to make a difference in the 3-point defeat to the Giants is hauntingly irresistible. But the lesson from Bill Belichick was harsh and probably necessary given what was at stake:

You lose the football, you lose our trust, and you lose your playing time.

That cold teaching moment was dredged up again Sunday when Ridley spit up the football with 5:19 remaining and the Patriots trying to finish off the Broncos after a 31-7 lead had been reduced to 31-21.

The fumble did not prove disastrous, and Ridley would not be the Alcoa Running Back Goat of the Day -- that dubious distinction went to Denver's Willis McGahee, who dropped a fourth-and-1 pass that killed one drive (cue Manning ripping off his chin strap), then fumbled the ball right back to the Patriots after Ridley's blunder (cue Manning calling Edgerrin James's agent on the Broncos' behalf).

But it did prove to be his final carry of the day -- Brandon Bolden came on to close out the victory with three carries on the final clock-killing possession. And rather than punctuating his career-best performance (28 carries, 151 yards, 1 TD, and plenty of scene-stealing from the marquee Manning/Tom Brady showdown) with one more exclamation point, Ridley ended it as somewhat of a question mark.

Asked afterward whether he would remember the good or the bad from the game, he did not hesitate in his replay.

"The negative. Not going to lie,'' he said. "It was late in the game, you've got to close it out, you've got to run the football, and I told myself before that play that I had to hold on to the football. ... You can't make any excuses, I messed up.''

Presumably Ridley spent the offseason with the football glued to his hands wherever he went, just like the Omar Epps character in "The Program.'' So, sure, it is a disconcerting that he lost his grip on it Sunday, and you couldn't help but wonder had it happened earlier in the game when or if he would have returned to the field.

"I'm sure Coach is going to have something to say about it, but like I said there's always another day tomorrow,'' Ridley said. "So I'll be back to work and working ball security high and tight. And that's all I can do."

It's easy to get stuck with a reputation as a fumbler, and once you have it, it's tougher to shake than an unblocked Brandon Spikes. Ridley may be on the verge of getting slapped with such a label, but he doesn't deserve it. Sunday's fumble was the fourth of his NFL career in 202 touches. That's not great, but it's not Cleveland Gary putting the ball on the ground 12 times for the 1990 Rams, either.

In college, Ridley fumbled three times. Fumbling is a problem Kevin Faulk had early in his career and overcame, and it's something that never was a consideration with BenJarvus Green-Ellis, who suddenly has the first two of his pro career this season in Cincinnati.

It's football. They hit each other hard. It's going to happen even to the most surehanded ball carriers.

Ridley still needs to prove that he can hold on to the ball under pressure, when the game's momentum is teetering in the balance and the defense expects the run. But even if Ridley is at the point now where defenses are on alert about his occasional inability to protect the football, Belichick should not and most likely will not bury him like he did last postseason. Because this much has changed: He's become essential.

The Patriots piled up 251 yards on the ground Sunday, the second straight week they've surpassed 200. The balance on offense -- Wes Welker had 13 receptions, Tom Brady threw for 233 yards, and the 35 first downs set a franchise standard -- was remarkable, especially when you remember that the last time they played the Broncos, Aaron Hernandez led the way with 61 rushing yards.

It is not an exaggeration to say this could be the most well-rounded offense they have had in the Brady/Belichick era, and yes, that includes 2007. The running game won't match what they had in 1976 or '78 in John Hannah's heyday, or even in the mid-80s with Craig James and Tony Collins. But it's a heck of a lot better than the tap-dancing Laurence Maroney gave them five years ago, and it could be the best they've had since Corey Dillon was at the peak of his powers.

Not that Belichick was about to agree to any such comparisons Sunday.

"I don't know. I think we're looking a whole lot different -- I'd say it's a lot different,'' Belichick said. "Scheme, multiple players, there's no Corey Dillon. It's a different style, different types of running plays, different style of runners.''

The different style of runners is what is making this work. The pieces fit beautifully, but only if Ridley is at the forefront. He is the closest thing they have to a prototypical feature back, a close-to-ideal combination of power and speed; three or four times a game he comes close to breaking one.

Five games into his career, Bolden (54 yards Sunday) is already established as another rookie free-agent steal. While he's not quite as powerful and has a little more elusiveness, it's impossible to watch him and not be reminded of his predecessor Green-Ellis. Danny Woodhead (47 yards on seven carries and one huge third-down conversion) is very effective when used in moderation. Even Shane Vereen chipped in with a one-yard touchdown run, prompting this comical postgame exchange between a reporter and Belichick:

Reporter: "What is it about Vereen that has you favoring him on the goal line?"

Belichick: "What are you talking about?"

Reporter: "The touchdown run that he had earlier."

Belichick: "He was in the game.''

The same couldn't be said for Ridley at the end. But despite his gaffe Sunday that jostled those memories of his gaffes as a rookie, it will be more often than not.

"It didn't end the way I wanted, but besides that I'm just thankful to be out there. Some thngs are going in my favor and some aren't,'' he said. ''For me, I just need to come back in here and get back to work. But we're going to continue to work hard. That's the only way they do it around here, and that's the team way."

@GlobeChadFinn

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

The fresh start so desperately required by the rudderless Red Sox arrived symbolically and fiscally during those two surreal August days when the Dodgers graciously allowed Ben Cherington to heave $270 million worth of sluggish and/or injury-prone underachievers in their general direction.

Though it's not easy to accept when a team that began the season with pennant hopes waves the white flag with more than a month remaining, the blockbuster that sent Adrian Gonzalez, Josh Beckett, Carl Crawford, and that other guy to Los Angeles was necessary and perhaps overdue.

It was not, however, a total fresh start, for one more significant transaction was required. Fortunately for the present and future of this franchise, that happened Thursday afternoon when Bobby Valentine was fired after one disastrous season as manager.

If there was ever a no-brainer about a manager, this was it. Baseball-reference will record the vital stats for all eternity, and the record shows that during Valentine's single pathetic season -- which came a decade after he left the Mets in similar disarray -- the Red Sox won 69 games, lost 93, went 7-22 after Sept. 1, and never really contended save for a brief glimmer after the All-Star break before David Ortiz hobbled off to the disabled list, taking any faint hopes with him.

Valentine is not the worst manager in recent Red Sox history (my frame of reference begins in 1978). Joe Kerrigan, whose ego ran amok to the point that he wanted to change Manny Ramirez's swing and endangered Pedro Martinez's health, has retired that dubious distinction. Butch Hobson was overmatched, Don Zimmer was paranoid and petty. But save for Kerrigan, there hasn't been one I've been happier to see go.

I've had months to come up with a better way of saying it, but I don't know that there is one, so I'm going to stick with my standard line: Valentine made everything worse, which is actually quite impressive given the mess he inherited from last September. His default mode is sarcasm, and he turtles as if he had been trained by Claude Lemieux when he's asked about his latest passive-aggressive, often snide comment that inevitably turned a brush fire into an inferno. Who, me? Yes, you. Again.

Valentine is not a disciplinarian. He is a divider who never conquers, and while the players are hardly innocent in this disaster, they saw through his insincerity, pandering, and selective criticism from the beginning. It's not often I say Curt Schilling was right .. but Curt Schilling was right. And so was Dustin Pedroia -- that's not the way they should do things around here. Valentine fell off the figurative bike and into the ditch before the team even departed Fort Myers.

The most damning evidence against him is not his relationship with Kevin Youkilis or Pedroia or the venomous Alfredo Aceves, or any other player still here or long gone. It was those petty feuds with the coaching staff. The Red Sox' starting pitching was atrocious almost to a man, yet Valentine and pitching coach Bob McClure barely spoke to one another until the latter was eventually dismissed. Does that suggest a manager who is spending as much energy as possible in a quest for success? No. It suggests a manager protecting his territory, ego, and image at the expense of the team.

I don't understand how anyone can still back him. Yes, it was just one year, but all the evidence necessary to prove he was not the right man for the job was collected long before the Red Sox went quietly in the ninth inning of Game 162 in the Bronx Wednesday night. Chad Ochocinco got one year. You didn't hear anyone pining for the Patriots to bring him back, you know? Sometimes it takes less than a year to prove incompetence beyond all doubt. It took Valentine a couple of months.

We were told Valentine was a bright tactician. I bought that one, clinged to it. But I'm still waiting for an example. What's his legacy there? Pinch hitting for Jose Iglesias in the middle of an at-bat? Putting Scott Podsednik in the No. 3 spot, then feigning ignorance when asked why? Leaving Jon Lester in to give up double-figure runs, prompting the silly but telling Bobby V Super-Duper Haters Club meeting in New York?

His greatest success? I suppose it's getting good seasons out of relievers such as Scott Atchison and Junichi Tazawa, or perhaps finding roles in which roster filler such as Daniel Nava and Pedro Ciriaco could thrive in short bursts. Of course, they were also two regulars on -- how exactly did he put it? -- "the weakest roster we've ever had in September in the history of baseball.'' Apparently his support began and ended at writing their names on the lineup card.

If there's any blessing in this disaster, I suppose it's twofold: Maybe now the Red Sox will stop making decisions with NESN in mind. If Tom Werner vows on some radio show that they're going to sign a big free agent this offseason, you'll know they're still tone-deaf and hopeless.

Also -- and this is even more crucial -- now maybe Larry Lucchino will stop fancying himself as Earl Weaver in sharper clothing and let Ben Cherington do his job. The first-year general manager has had more misses than hits so far, but he's no newbie; he has been a part of this organization longer than John Henry has owned the team. He is bright, reasonable, informed, and, at least Thursday, decisive.

His next well-considered but swift move should be to find Valentine's successor, starting with an inquiry about what it would take to get John Farrell, another well-rounded baseball man, from Toronto. If the price is prohibitive, the search should commence immediately, and the choice should be Cherington's call and his alone.

Who knows, perhaps the next guy, whoever he is, can get them over the seven-win hump next September.

But for now, we'll settle for Valentine's greatest contribution during his year here -- going away, and leaving behind a truly fresh start.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Not to be too cynical -- well, actually, forget that, because you probably can't be too cynical about a Red Sox team that finished 13 games under .500 at home, attempted and probably pulled off a wag-the-dog on us by celebrating the eighth anniversary of the 2004 champs for no reason other than to distract us from the lemon of the moment, and continues to pretend that a distribution streak is the same thing as a sellout and that we actually care about the damn thing.

So yeah, I'll be cynical for a second before getting back to the usual good cheer. (Don't snicker. I heard you snicker.) The best thing about the Red Sox wrapping up their home schedule Wednesday night is that it's the last time we're going to see some of these guys represent the uniform at Fenway Park. There's usually a feeling of melancholy when Fenway closes for the season, but this year it's fleeting at best. The tourist traps are empty, vacancy abounds, almost like it used to be, before the circus came to town. If only the circus hadn't left such a stench behind. I think we all know now why the Yankees couldn't wait to get rid of Alfredo Aceves and his 24-3 career record, don't we? He's at the top of our good riddance list.

OK, now about that good cheer. There are the usual reasons for hope for next year -- Clay Buchholz, Dustin Pedroia, David Ortiz, Jon Lester, and Jacoby Ellsbury would form a decent core when healthy, presuming they all return. And there are also some smaller ones that may have been lost in the melodrama of the summer or the indifference of fall. Here are a few players I'm looking forward to seeing at Fenway again next April ...

Junichi Tazawa: The life and movement on his secondary pitches was apparent when he first came up in 2009, but the Atlantic League is full of pitchers with good breaking stuff who didn't have the velocity to succeed in the big leagues. Tazawa's fastball wasn't blowing anyone away, and you wondered whether his was as mythical a creation as Daisuke Matsuzaka's gyroball. But here he is, three seasons and a Tommy John surgery later, having emerged as an outstanding reliever (1.54 ERA, 43 strikeouts and 5 walks in 41 innings). And you know what? He's throwing harder. According to Fangraphs, his average fastball velocity is up 2.4 miles per hour from '09. Perhaps that's because of the switch to the 'pen, perhaps he's one of those oft-rumored pitchers who actually benefited from Tommy John surgery, but it's apparent that he's going to have a very important role on the staff next year.

Jose Iglesias: If you stop by this space with any regularity, you probably know that I have expressed serious skepticism about whether the 22-year-old shortstop will ever hit enough to justify a spot in a major league lineup. Looking at that .589 OPS in more than 700 Triple A plate appearances, it starts to feel like those Rey Ordonez comps might be aiming too high, which is something that has probably never been said before. Some of my skepticism is probably an attempt to counterbalance those who absurdly thought Iglesias should have been the Opening Day starter when he hadn't yet proved adequate in Triple A. He wasn't ready then, and given his .118 average through 60 plate appearances in majors this season, he probably isn't now. He may never be. But good heavens, that otherworldly glove makes you hope he gets every single chance to succeed. Watching him play defense has been one of the few reasons to tune in to NESN the past couple of weeks. (OK, months.) Iglesias hit .251 at Pawtucket this year. If he can do that in the big leagues, with that highlight-reel defense, he'll be around for a long time.

Will Middlebrooks: Practically lost in all of the other lousy stories that engulfed this team through the summer was the season-ending wrist injury the promising 24-year-old third baseman suffered when he was hit by an Esmil Rogers fastball Aug. 11. If Middlebrooks and Papi had remained healthy, might things have played out differently? OK, probably not, since neither can pitch. But it was a terrific rookie season -- .288, 15 home runs, .835 OPS -- in which he proved capable of being a cornerstone for the next half-dozen years or so. Random aside: Which team do you think he thinks would win a seven-game series -- the '12 Sox, or the Arizona Fall League team he played for following last season?

Felix Doubront: I totally agree with Peter Abraham's take the other day that the Red Sox can't enter next season with the young lefty slotted in the No. 3 spot in the rotation. His level of success this season has probably been exaggerated because of the failings of the more established pitchers around him -- it will be a disappointment if Doubront can't knock at least one run off his 4.91 ERA next season. But he might just do it. He's whiffed over a batter per inning this season (157 in 154 innings), including 31 in 26.1 innings in September. That's a strong indication that he has the stuff to succeed long-term, and perhaps even become more than a No. 3 starter eventually.

Cody Ross: He's fun to watch, a happy-go-lucky masher of lefties (1.017 OPS this year, .928 career) with a swing made to put a few dents in the wall. And personality-wise, he's one of the few recent Sox who would have fit in perfectly with the fun-loving, take-no-prisoners 2004 club, which is about the highest compliment there is around here. Yeah, Ross has his flaws, and in a perfect world he platoons with a healthy Ryan Kalish, but here's hoping he's back for the next couple of seasons. Ben Cherington got this one right. Here's hoping he hits on a few more Ross-types just as his predecessor did in the winters of 2003-04.

@GlobeChadFinn

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Baseball and the Red Sox have occupied a meaningful place in my life for about as long as I can remember, and it's out of tradition and habit that a season's pending end comes with a tinge of melancholy.

No matter whether the final scenes feature a popup falling softly into Graig Nettles's glove, a routine and soon forgotten play concluding a routine and soon forgotten season, or a pigpile of delirious humanity on a mound in St. Louis, I always dread the long, cold wait until next year.

But that sense of wanting the season to last just a little bit longer, well, it's not coming around this year. Not with this team and this manager.

I'm not waiting for next year. I'm waiting for this year to hurry up and turn into Celtics season.

Mercifully, a season that never really began -- they were never more than five games above .500 -- is almost over. Tonight marks the 150th game of the Bobby Valentine era, a justifiable one-and-done, it's-not-us-it's-you divorce if there ever should be one. It will be either their 69th win or their 82d loss during this season almost entirely devoid of memories worth retaining.

The completion of tonight's formality will leave 12 games to go. And once those dozen games are complete, he has to go.

There should be no drama around it, no period of further evaluation, and surely no second thoughts. He was the wrong man for the job, capable tactically but incapable of being tactful, always certain above all else to leave himself enough wiggle-room in his passive-aggressive criticisms that he could always claim his intent or his "humor" was misunderstood.

Last September, during the 7-20 meltdown and the nuclear fallout that followed, it didn't seem like things could get any worse. Instead, Terry Francona was replaced by a person in Valentine whose greatest talent, even beyond ballroom dancing, deck-building, or being a wrap impresario, is making everything worse. Everything.

He gripes about drama, as he did on the "Dan Patrick Show" Wednesday, and yet he seems wholly incapable of passing up an opportunity to create some. There have been more Bobby V.-inflicted or exaggerated messes this season than there were in the first 7 seasons and 5 months of Francona's tenure.

The abbreviated list: There was the unsolicited Kevin Youkilis criticism that essentially cost him the clubhouse, the time he turned Liam Hendriks into a lefty, batting Scott Podsednik third then feigning ignorance about the lineup, his contentious, weird "punch-you-in-the-mouth" interview with Glenn Ordway (possibly a point in his favor, actually), the backfired sarcasm aimed at Will Middlebrooks, letting Alfredo Aceves show him up and show him up again, and on and on.

Most recently, there was his decision to send up Daniel Nava (.148 in 62 second-half plate appearances) to hit for struggling Jose Iglesias with two strikes, a moment when Valentine confirmed beyond a doubt that he'll never resist the chance to look like the smartest guy in the room, even if it means humiliating a young player in a meaningless game.

Can you imagine if he had Bill Belichick's job? He'd might have traded Wes Welker to the Chicago Bears for the football equivalent of Zach Stewart by now.

If the Iglesias/Nava look-at-me nonsense wasn't the quintessential Bobby V. moment, then it's second to last Friday's occurrence, when Valentine offered this response to the question of whether there were specific aspects of the roster that could use reinforcements from Triple A: "This is the weakest roster we've ever had in September in the history of baseball. It could use help everywhere."

The hyperbole there is understandable to some degree -- he's frustrated, very little has gone right, and he's smart enough to know he's blown his last chance to manage in the big leagues, a chance that took a decade to come along.

But just when you start to feel a tinge of sympathy for him, you remember that he's covering his own failings, notice that he retreats as soon as he's called on it, and that it's not really close to the truth -- he has one former MVP (Dustin Pedroia), last year's runner-up for MVP (Jacoby Ellsbury), and a couple of relatively accomplished starters (Jon Lester, Clay Buchholz), not to mention workmanlike pros such as Cody Ross and Jarrod Saltalamacchia and a group of young players trying to establish that they belong. The Astros should be so lucky.

Until his public embarrassment of Iglesias -- someone he wanted to make the team out of camp, by the way -- and his backhanded dismissal in one sarcastic swoop of the likes of relatively promising players Ryan Lavarnway, Junichi Tazawa and Ryan Kalish, I thought there was a chance he might be back next year.

But a manager who can't play for the future doesn't deserve to have one himself. Even Larry Lucchino, who is going to have to eat a concession stand's worth of crow on this, cannot justify keeping him around now.

Bobby Valentine has 12 games left as the manager of the Boston Red Sox after Wednesday. It's not a lot before the fresh start mercifully comes around again.

But it's also plenty of time for him to aggravate the fans and players with a dubious, self-serving comment or decision, and then do his who-me? moonwalk one more time.

For a man reputed to have many talents, he's proven here that he does nothing better than that.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Let's see, we've had two ex-big-league pitchers stop by the podcast this year. Between them, they played 49 seasons in the majors, pitching 1,969 games and winning 474 of them.

In July, it was Dennis Eckersley. Today, Jim Kaat. Both are on my short list of favorite baseball analysts, and both were terrific guests.

Kaat, who will be the game analyst for MLB Network's two exclusive Division Series playoff games Oct. 7 and 10, had a pitcher's insight on why Jon Lester has seemingly regressed (punctuating his point with some wisdom Johnny Sain once imparted on him), shared his admiration for what the A's and Orioles have accomplished, and agrees wholeheartedly with the opinion here that the Nationals have made a mistake by shutting down Stephen Strasburg.

If you have a few minutes, give it a listen. Kaat is always worth the time.

Subscribe to the podcast via iTunes. Find its archive here.

By Chad Finn, Globe Staff

Heidi Watney, who left NESN last November to return to her native California as the sideline reporter for Time Warner Cable SportsNet Lakers telecasts, has left the regional network without working a single game.

Time Warner, which began hiring its staff for Lakers broadcasts last year in advance of a rights agreement that begins with the 2012-13 season, announced its on-air team in a press release Wednesday.

Watney's absence was confirmation of summer-long speculation that she was no longer part of the network's plans.

Watney, a popular if occasionally controversial personality during her four years (2008-11) as NESN's in-game Red Sox reporter, was replaced by Mike Trudell as the Lakers' sideline reporter.

A network spokesman would not confirm an official date when her employment at TWC ended. But the network did provide a statement, first to Tom Hoffarth of the Los Angeles Daily News, on Watney's departure.

"Heidi Watney and Time Warner Cable Sports have reached an agreement that allows Heidi to leave the organization to pursue other opportunities. Both parties entered into their original agreement some months ago with the best of intentions, but as Time Warner Cable Sports has evolved toward its official launch, the talent needs of the network have been altered.

"Heidi and Time Warner Cable Sports have parted on good terms. Heidi is extremely talented and TWC Sports expects that she will have great success in her next role and throughout her entire career. We wish her well in her future endeavors."

Industry sources told the Globe that there was frustration on Time Warner's part that the news of Watney's hiring last November became public before the Lakers had been informed of it.

Further, the Lakers were livid, according to one source who was at one point a candidate for the job, because they had been assured by Time Warner not long before the news of Watney's hiring became public that they would have input in all personnel decisions. Time Warner had already hired Watney, the source said, when it agreed to the Lakers' wishes for a significant and perhaps even final say in each hire.

Her departure from TWC ends an unusual arrangement in which she was essentially on stand-by for a year, having been hired nearly a full year before the network would air its first Lakers game.

In August, the website The Big Lead was the first to report that there had been falling out between Watney and the network. That speculation was fueled further when Watney recently auditioned for a role on ESPN's "First Take" that eventually went to Cari Champion.

Watney's next endeavor remains a mystery. She has not responded to a message Thursday inquiring about her status and whether she'd consider a return to Boston. But such a scenario seems unlikely.

While she was popular with viewers and handled her role with increased capability each year she was on NESN, the University of San Diego graduate admitted to occasional homesickness for the other coast while she was in Boston. Her eventual departure was not greeted with disappointment by some co-workers who found her difficult.

Watney nearly left the network after her second year by mutual decision, but the network picked up the option on the third year of her contract.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Yep, you've got a point. I suppose the last name probably isn't necessary in the headline there.

There's only one Nomar, and the former Red Sox shortstop is back in a familiar neighborhood, serving as an analyst for ESPN's "Wednesday Night Baseball'' telecast of a Red Sox-Yankees game that isn't as meaningful to the home team as it seemed it would be when the schedule was released.

But Garciaparra, who will be joined by Dave O'Brien and Curt Schilling in the Sox-centric booth, told me Wednesday morning that it is always a thrill for him to return to Boston, where he played from late 1996 to until his shocking trade to the Cubs in midsummer 2004.

"I retired a Red Sox for a reason,'' he said. "It's always in my heart. This is where I came up, and the fans always have embraced me, I always feel at home when I'm here."

Garciaparra, famously wary of the media during his last days in Boston, couldn't have been more gracious and engaging Wednesday. Here are some of his other thoughts in response to TATB's Five Questions:

1. Playing games that don't have much at stake this time of year is not something you had to deal with with while you were with the Red Sox. This will actually be the franchise's first losing year since you were a rookie in 1997. But when you did have to deal with this, did you have to make a conscious effort to remain fully engaged? I mean, the Red Sox seemed to enjoy playing the role of spoiler Tuesday, but it can't be that fulfilling, can it?

Nomar: "It's funny, that's an interesting question, because I have been very fortunate. As a rookie, I can tell you I wasn't even thinking about that, because you're a rookie, and you're trying to establish yourself in the big leagues and prove you belong every time you go out there. With the Red Sox, we were always in the hunt. Maybe you'd be out of it a week or so at the end of the season after you were eliminated. Even going over to the National League with the Cubs and Dodgers, I was pretty lucky and fortunate. The only time after that was really my last year in Oakland [the A's went 75-87 in 2009] when we knew we were out of it this time of year.

"But there's a sense of pride you have as a player. I remember people saying then, 'Well, we could be the spoiler,' but I never needed any of that. I had my drive every single day to go out there and play as hard as I could. That was my mentality, I'm winning that day. That day, regardless of who we were playing against or what our record was, we were going to win.

"It's always better when you're playing for the playoffs or there's a major goal in front of you, you're trying to get somewhere. There's no question. That helps you get through the aches and pains that accumulate for everyone over the season, to be playing for something. But you've still got to go out there and compete. You've still got to go out there and try to win every single day. Every single day. That doesn't change. That's a mentality that athletes have to have. I don't think you can get to the major league level without having it, actually. If I play you at ping-pong or checkers or whatever it is, I'm going to try to beat you."

2. I like my chances better at checkers. Looking back at that '97 team, which went 78-84, you guys had a stacked lineup, seven or eight guys over .300, but the pitching let you down. That was remedied pretty fast with the Pedro deal and you turned it around the next year and made the playoffs. Looking at this Red Sox team, it seems like it's going to take a much longer process. Have you had a chance to look at them and consider where they should go from here?

Nomar: "I have, and I think the most important thing is that there needs to be a cohesive message coming from the top, you know what I mean? It's not just the players. I think that right now, ownership, management, all the way down, it doesn't seem like they're on the same page, and when they have a cohesive message and are working properly together, that carries all the way down to the players.

"I do think the huge trade [with the Dodgers], pretty much unprecedented in history from what I understand, is something that really helps them get on with the process. It should benefit both sides, though the Dodgers are still having trouble scoring runs. But it frees up all of that money for the Red Sox. Right now, they're in kind of a crisis -- I don't know if crisis is the right word, but there's something at the top that's not functioning properly, and they all have to get together and regroup and say, 'What are we going to do and what is our message and approach?' It's always easier, as a corporation, a baseball team, whatever, to begin progressing forward when you have the financial flexibility to do so. At the least, they've put themselves in that position. Now they're gathering themselves and saying, 'How do we right this ship?' So I think it was a good move in that sense.

"But the Dodgers really got some quality players. Adrian Gonzalez had his struggles this year with the Boston Red Sox, but he's a guy who you almost always talk about as an MVP candidate, a contender. He's still a great player, and I think Carl Crawford will be a little bit better over with the Dodgers than he was in Boston. At the least, the bigger outfield will play to his strengths. You'll see that athleticism displayed again, and a little different environment might help him.''

3. There are some pretty interesting parallels between your career here and Dustin Pedroia's. You debuted 10 years apart, both won Rookie of the Year awards, he won the MVP in his second year and you were the runner-up in yours, both of you were wildly popular with the fans almost from the beginning. Yet it wasn't perfect. You both had to deal with some pretty significant injuries, and you ran into difficulties in terms of perception in your last days here that bear some similarity to issues Pedroia has dealt with this year. You ended up getting traded. Pedroia has made it clear he doesn't want to go anywhere. Is there any advice you'd give him on how to deal with everything that comes with playing in Boston?

Nomar: "My advice to him is just to focus on what you can control. And what you can control is going out there, playing your game, playing hard like he always does, and keep doing all of the things that made him successful in the first place. Playing the game the right way, playing it hard, running it out, and whatever people are saying, don't worry about it, because you can't control that. I know that sometimes maybe I did let it get to me too much from time to time, and I learned from that. What people say doesn't change who you are, and it shouldn't change how you go about your business or your approach to playing the game. Regardless of what's being said on the outside, the guys on the inside know what's really going on that, you're playing hard, maybe you're playing through pain, and you're giving it everything you have."

4. It's kind of strange to be talking to you about these games that really have stakes only for the Yankees, since the primary recollection of you is as such central a figure during arguably the pinnacle of the Red Sox-Yankees rivalry, that incredibly intense stretch that began in 1998. So I have to take the opportunity to ask you about one particular game from that era -- Pedro's 17-strikeout, 1-hit masterpiece at Yankees Stadium that took place 13 years ago yesterday. Does it seem that long ago, and was that the best-pitched game you ever witnessed?

Nomar: "No, it really doesn't, and I'm lucky that I remember games like that so vividly. There were two pitching performances that I was on the field for that were really incredible -- that one, and when Roger [Clemens] struck out 20 in Detroit right after I first came up in '96. I tell you, what really stood out from Pedro's performance, other than that he probably had the three best pitches you could ever imagine working for him that night, is that when he came off the mound, the fans at Yankee Stadium gave him a standing ovation. I think that says it all. As bitter as the rivalry was then, there was still a respect that goes with it, and the fans showed him that that night. It was an appreciation of his performance. It goes without saying we didn't usually get that kind of reaction at Yankee Stadium at that point in time."

5. Sort of an interesting dynamic in the booth for Wednesday's game, with three people who have significant Red Sox ties in you, Curt Schilling, and Dave O'Brien on the play by play. Should we expect that the three of you will delve into the Red Sox issues maybe a little more than we might expect typically, and more important, do you have assurances that Schilling will let you get a word in edgewise?

Nomar: [Laughing] "Yeah, I think we'll probably dig into the Sox, the depth of it probably depending on how the game is going. As far as Schill goes, we'll find out. You'll just have to stay tuned for that to see how it all plays out.''

And because it just seems appropriate, a bonus sixth question, in honor of No. 6, Nomar's mentor of sorts and fellow legendary Red Sox shortstop, the late Johnny Pesky ...

6. The Red Sox announced today that they'll pay another tribute to Johnny with a ceremony before their game September 23. Your bond with him was well-known when you played here. Can you speak to what he meant to you personally?

Nomar: "He was a special man, a special person. My roots are in Southern California and that's where I grew up, and I didn't know much about the Boston Red Sox. It was Johnny who took me in and taught me what it meant to put that uniform on, what the tradition was about. That meant the world to me. And from there, we just had this incredible bond together that so special, just talking about baseball, and telling stories about Ted [Williams] and some of the guys he played with, or just always being there. It didn't matter if you were big leaguer, a minor leaguer, he was there for you, and he was that guy my entire career here that I knew I could talk to. He meant a lot to me, and he meant a lot to a lot of other people as well. He's missed. Baseball lost a great man, a great ambassador, and for a lot of us, a great friend.''

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Ah, yes. The Carl Everett glory days. I remember them well.

The silly pregame clubhouse wrestling matches with Darren Lewis. Charmingly showing kids on family day at Fenway how to properly cuss out an umpire. Breaking up Mike Mussina's perfect game, then acting like he'd actually won something of magnitude when the Sox still lost.

Sing it with me, Red Sox beat writers and scattered other Springsteen devotees:

Glory days. They'll pass you by. Glory days. Headbutting Ron Kulpa's eye. Glory dayyyyyyayayays.

Everett had a great first half when he arrived here in 2000. And beyond that, you constantly wished the miserable whack-job had never come here in the first place. He was the worst, and so was his final Red Sox team, the miserable 2001 crew, which, whether it's convenient to acknowledge at the moment, was far more repulsive than the current collection of dazed veterans and roster-fillers playing out the string at Fenway.

There's been no worse Red Sox team in my lifetime than that 2001 pack of jerk-store refugees. Oh, this is no fun -- it was never right from the beginning, and the manager is so out there on the brink right now that he probably believes the sellout streak is legit.

But what has happened this season is also a reminder of how consistently good we've had it around here since ... well, pretty much since Pedro Martinez's arrival in 1998. Save for the occasional hiccup, the Sox have been good to championship-level great for more than a decade. Even that Adrian Beltre 89-win "bridge year" looks pretty darned good right now.

It hasn't always been this way. The Red Sox have lost 100 games seven times in their history, most recently in 1965. From 1925-29, the fewest games they lost in a season was 96. They lost 111 in '32. And if you wonder why the dream in '67 seemed impossible, consider that they were coming off eight consecutive losing seasons.

My personal reference point begins with 1978, when they won 99 games -- fourth-most in franchise history -- but needed a 100th victory in the 163d game to play on, falling a run short. There were bouts of mediocrity in the early '80s, but the list of lousy Red Sox teams I've had to watch has been a short one.

In fact, this short:

2001
82 wins, 79 losses

The worst. The worst. You can argue among yourselves about who deserves the dubious dishonor of second place.

But there's no debate whose first among the worst if you remember the circumstances of 11 years ago. These guys were the worst, and I'm getting annoyed just thinking about them.

That wasn't always the perception -- it took them some time to reveal their true selves. The 2001 Red Sox were great fun for a while. Pedro Martinez still mesmerized every fifth day. Manny Ramirez's first season in Boston began gloriously -- he hit .408 with 9 homers in April. Jason Varitek and Trot Nixon continued to emerge. Hideo Nomo threw a no-hitter. They were in first place 97 games into the season.

But Manny got hurt, and then Pedro, and Varitek, and Nomar Garciaparra was only around for a cameo after his wrist injury. Jimy Williams was fired, replaced by overmatched egotist Joe Kerrigan, a capable pitching coach who carried himself like Alexander Cartwright Jr. had stolen his idea for a game.

The 2001 Red Sox finished with a winning record. But in their 6-15 September -- and during the weeks leading up to it -- too many of them were revealed to be unconscionable, self-interested losers. The atmosphere was poisoned by angry headcases (Everett, Jose Offerman) and bitter, fading, in-denial veterans who thought they should be playing every day (Mike Lansing, Dante Bichette). Shea Hillenbrand seemed like a nice kid when he made the team out of camp unexpectedly. He was as miserable as the rest of them by season's end.

The second-worst story of the 2001 Red Sox was Joe Kerrigan and Dan Duquette's insistence that Pedro try to pitch through rotator cuff pain that essentially had him throwing sidearm. It was the total opposite of what the Nationals have done with Stephen Strasburg this season, and it was shameful.

After a blowup with Kerrigan during a team work out in which Pedro ripped into Kerrigan, he made one more start, against the Yankees on Sept. 7. He lasted 54 pitches, topping out at 90 miles per hour. It was agonizing to watch, and even the Yankees suggested he shouldn't have been out there.

This, from Bob Hohler's game story, titled "Too Painful To Bear, Yankees Make It An Early Night For Martinez, Sox.''

"I thought a week ago he wasn't maybe as sharp as he is normally," [Yankees manager Joe] Torre said. "But I thought today was even more of a problem."

So why did the Sox send him back out?

"We pitched him," Kerrigan said, "because he wanted to pitch, he's healthy enough to pitch, and we're still in the pennant race."

Sort of. After the Bombers took their sixth game of seven from the Sox at Yankee Stadium and 11th of 16 overall, Kerrigan's crew was 11 games out in the American League East with 23 to play.

That they put Pedro at risk and questioned his commitment was beyond unconscionable. Both Duquette and Kerrigan should have been fired on the spot.

But that wasn't the worst story, though I suppose the one that owns that title could be apocryphal. The story -- I believe told by Peter Gammons, but I couldn't find reference to it anywhere via Google -- goes that Scott Hatteberg, in the wake of September 11, tried to organize his teammates into making a team-wide donation to a charity related to the unthinkable tragedy. But the gesture never became reality because so few of his teammates were willing to reach into their own pockets to help. It's a tale of such selfishness and narcissism that it's almost impossible to believe. But with the wretched 2001 Red Sox, it fits the pattern more than anything else.

1992
73 wins, 89 losses

Since the blockbuster trade with the Dodgers that got Josh Beckett out of our faces, it's not that the current Red Sox are so unlikable. It's more that they're so damn boring. There's no one, save for maybe Dustin Pedroia, who you stop what you're doing to watch hit, and while Clay Buchholz has been decent this year, it's not as if we look forward to his turn in the rotation. It's hard to believe a franchise that won a World Series five years ago could be so dull so soon.

But they'll never be as dull as their counterparts from 20 years ago, the Butch Hobson-helmed seventh-place finishers in the AL East. The pitching was respectable, if not respectful -- Roger Clemens, who instantly undermined the new manager in spring training by refusing to remove his headphones while Hobson attempted to talk to him, went 18-11 with a 2.41 ERA and led the AL in bWAR (8.4). Frank Viola was a quality No. 2 starter, going 13-12 with a 3.44 ERA in 238 innings. Joe Hesketh was involved.

But the offense ... let's just say that if there's an opposite of a corked bat, that's what they were all using. The '92 Sox scored 3.7 runs per game, second-worst in the AL to the Angels. Wade Boggs hit just .259. Mo Vaughn hit .234 with 13 homers. Jack Clark hit .210 and bought a lot of sports cars. Bob Zupcic somehow had 432 plate appearances.

How feeble were they? Well, Tom Brunansky won the team Triple Crown -- with a .266 batting average, 15 homers, and 74 RBIs.

It's not that they were particularly unlikable. They were just unusually lousy.

1997
78 wins, 84 losses

You know what? Let's keep it to two that were worse that the current disaster. Because despite this team's fourth-place finish and its unwanted and soon-to-be-shaken status as the most recent Red Sox team finish below .500, there was actually quite a bit to like. Starting with a certain slugging rookie shortstop with a first name made for the Boston accent.

Nomar Garciaparra -- Nomahhhhh! to you -- arrived on the scene and instantly captivated Red Sox fans with his quirks (adjusting his batting gloves then adjusting them again just in case, slinging sliders to first after ranging to his right), passion (I can still picture him low to the ground, head forward, darting out of the batter's box after roping one into the gap -- he always ran hard), and immense talent (he had 85 extra-base hits, and there was a time when it felt like a line drive was the result of every single one of his at-bats).

I'll always wish it had ended better for him here, but man, was it ever fun for a while.

Like pretty much every other team in the heart of that particular era, the Red Sox scored a ton of runs -- 851 total, or 5.25 per game, which ranked fourth in the AL. Mo Vaughn hit 35 homers with a .980 OPS. John Valentin hit .306 with 18 homers. Troy O'Leary, Mike Stanley, Jeff Frye and Reggie Jefferson all hit over .300.

Despite the firepower, they never contended, peaking at two games over .500, going 9-17 in May, and entering the All-Star break as an afterthought at 38-48. You probably don't need to be told at this point that the pitching was terrible, but I'll confirm it anyway. This was the Season Without An Ace -- Roger Clemens moved to the Houston suburb of Toronto after the '96 season, and Pedro Martinez would arrive courtesy of the Expos in November 1997. Tom Gordon was the Opening Day starter, Aaron Sele the top winner (13, with a 5.38 ERA), and former Braves star Steve Avery left his fastball in Atlanta, finishing with a 6.42 ERA.

The bullpen was just as horrendous -- John Wasdin, ol' Way Back himself, was tops on the club in appearances, which tells you everything -- but even then it all worked out for the best. On the July 31 trading deadline, supposed closer and confirmed bullpen arsonist Heathcliff Slocumb was dealt to the Seattle Mariners for a pair of minor leaguers in what is on a very short list of the best trades in Red Sox history.

Jason Varitek and Derek Lowe had one at-bat and 16 innings pitched between them for the '97 Sox, but they'd go on to create some of the most legendary moments in franchise lore.

It may have been a lost season, but 1997 proved crucial in building a foundation for the great things to come. Fifteen years later, the best we can ask is that the same is someday said about this Red Sox team, the second-worst my eyes have seen.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Have to imagine Ben Cherington didn't expect the first test of discipline -- that buzzword now so associated with the post-blockbuster Red Sox that it's a wonder it hasn't been etched on Fenway bricks and sold for the low, low price of $475 -- to come so soon.

But there it was Wednesday morning, accessed on the in-house MLB information wire by general managers such as Cherington and on Ken Rosenthal's Twitter feed for the rest of us: The Twins had placed catcher Joe Mauer on waivers.

Under normal circumstances, a player of Mauer's magnitude appearing on the wire would look like a formality, and it probably was, just the Twins gauging interest on a player they had no intention of letting go as a you-can-have-him waiver claim. The St. Paul native is the ultimate tale of a local-boy-made-good, and even with $142.5 million remaining on his contract, he's still a fair bet to be a career-long Twin.

But circumstances around here since last Friday night have tilted away from normal and have pretty much been stuck on extraordinary, and after the Red Sox shed more than $270 million in payroll in a single franchise-altering deal that seemed implausible when its parameters first leaked, it's probably not wise to dismiss anything as a possibility with this franchise right now.

Mauer is a player the Red Sox were known to covet before he signed his eight-year, $184-million deal to remain in Minnesota in March 2010. Why wouldn't they? He was a prime-of-career (just 26) catcher (love those producers at a premium position) who was coming off a season in which he won his third batting title (.365, while also leading the league in on-base percentage, .444, and slugging, .587). He also clubbed 28 homers, more than doubling his career high.

He was awesome, but in retrospect, the Twins probably locked him up at the very peak of his powers. He has hit just 20 homers total in the three seasons since, having been tormented by injuries and Target Field (four homers in 726 career plate-appearances there). He's lost some luster since his hellacious '09 output, but he's having a fine season by most players' standards (.309/.403/.425), he's remained healthy, and he won't be 30 until next April.

Cherington seems to have a pretty fair poker face -- he's so even-keeled publicly that I suspect sometimes that he has been programmed by Carmine and not vice versa-- but he must have at least arched an eyebrow when he saw Mauer's name Monday morning. That the Sox did not put in a claim is no surprise -- as intriguing as Mauer might be, his injury history makes it too much of a risk given the salary that remains. And the contradictory message it would send after the Dodgers deal would be difficult to explain away.

(I can't be the only one who amused to see the ticker message on NESN that said a "source'' indicated the Red Sox would not claim Mauer. Or maybe it's just because, fairly or not, I read it as this: NESN reports you do not have our permission to claim him, Ben.)

Anyway, the mantra of discipline survives its first real test, and we can get back to the question that will follow this team into the offseason: What will Cherington do to bolster this roster?

There's a better chance of reacquiring Josh Beckett from the Dodgers and giving him a nine-figure contract extension than there is of showering that new-found loot on Josh Hamilton and Zack Greinke this offseason.

Does he re-sign Jacoby Ellsbury, who is just five months younger than Mauer, had one tremendous season, two good ones, and two devastated by injury? The reports that he's open to staying with the Red Sox strike this occasional cynic as little more than a way for his agent to make sure all options remain open. Weird, but free-agency apparently isn't so appealing when your home run total has dropped from 32 to 2.

The Red Sox do have the chips in the farm system to trade for a prime-of-career star approaching free agency who may be too pricy for a smaller market team -- you know, kind of like they did with Adrian Gonzalez. As wise teams such as the Rays lock up their young stars earlier by buying out their arbitration years, there are fewer appealing players of such high caliber available, and those should-be-untouchables who might be there for the taking, such as the Diamondbacks' Justin Upton, sometimes give you an uneasy feeling that there's something you don't know. I heard one sports radio host suggest Wednesday that the Red Sox should pursue the Pirates' Andrew McCutchen. I imagine they might, when the $51.5 million contract extension he signed in March expires after the 2017 season.

It's not going to be easy to rebuild (call it reload if that makes the bridge seem shorter) from this, even with all of the cash and assets at Cherington's disposal. And that's why I disagree with the suggestion that the Dodgers blockbuster will stand as the definitive move of his tenure. Oh, it will be a significant part of his Official General Manager Epitaph someday, just as Dan Duquette will be remembered for Pedro and Manny and Tek/Lowe and Crazy Carl and Jose Offerman's on-base capabilities, or how Theo Epstein will be remembered for a lot of good moves early (Papi, Schilling, Mueller, the Nomar blockbuster) and a lot of bad money late (Crawford, John Lackey, and the oft-overlooked awful signing of Bobby Jenks).

But it's premature to define Cherington on this one move when we don't yet know what he'll do after the Dodgers helped him hit that reset button. While his youthful, low-key manner makes it easy to forget that he's been a part of this organization longer than John Henry has owned the team, his dossier as a general manager is still thin; the Josh Reddick/Andrew Bailey deal doesn't look great, and neither does Mark Melancon/Jed Lowrie, though I'm willing to give those deals more time. The Cody Ross signing was a perfect secondary move, one you hope Cherington can replicate through the years to bolster the roster, and this Pedro Ciriaco fella is at the least a fan-favorite for the moment.

But his legacy won't so much be about Dodgers deal, but what he does with opportunity he has been given. Maybe he will get some executive of the year votes for executing this deal, this escape from baseball purgatory, and it's nice that his perception is favorable, because my thought on him all along is that he's an extremely capable baseball person put it an extraordinarily challenging position.

Maybe his bosses will even give him a plaque commemorating the occasion. But if the Red Sox are to collect more meaningful trophies and prizes in their future, Cherington not only has to be disciplined, he has to be right. After passing on Mauer, I'd say he's 1 for 1.

@GlobeChadFinn

This week's edition is dedicated entirely to the big deal over the weekend. No, not the Orioles' swap of Matt Lindstrom to Arizona for Joe Saunders. You know, that other one.

I'm joined by Eric Wilbur and host Daigo Fujiwara, and I'm going to reiterate one point here that was made in the podcast: Yes, I agree with the oft-repeated sentiment that sending Adrian Gonzalez, Carl Crawford, Josh Beckett, and special guest star Nick Punto to the Dodgers sounds like something a sports-radio caller would cook up. But the difference is that trade-happy sports radio callers would suggest getting Matt Kemp, Clayton Kershaw, and Hanley Ramirez in return.

Also, that's Rubby De La Rosa in the picture. Figure it's a good idea to learn what some of these new Sox prospects actually look like.

Subscribe to the podcast via iTunes. Find its archive here.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

A trio of leftover thoughts tied to The Trade while wondering which team makes the postseason sooner, the bridge-crossing Sox or Theo's Cubs ...

You might find a scattered Red Sox fan or two who is still lamenting that Adrian Gonzalez, a hitter who will not be easily replaced, was the cost of getting rid of the Josh Beckett malignancy. But I doubt you'll find anyone beyond fellow Cabela's Big Game Hunter enthusiast John Lackey who wishes the regressing righthander with a habit of choosing defiance over accountability hadn't been dealt.

He's taken his smirking moon-face and 7-13 record and 5.26 ERA over the last calendar year to LA, where he'll surely annoy us from afar by humming a "Hell Yeah, I Like Beer/I Love LA'' medley while finding his former good form just to spite Sox fans one more time. He pitched decently Monday night -- 5.2 innings, 7 hits, 3 earned runs -- and that will be good enough to win more than he loses with that star-studded offense backing him.

But you know, now that we're looking at Beckett's time here in the rear-view mirror, it probably should be acknowledged that he's a more pivotal figure in Red Sox history -- yes, in a good way -- than most of us are liable to remember for a while.

He is vilified for his performance in September 2011 and beyond, and he deserved every bit of grief, every single boo. But as my kindred spirits at Surviving Grady pointed out, not only was he everything an ace is supposed to be during the ride to the 2007 World Series title, but he actually already had a deep reservoir of goodwill built up with Red Sox fans for something he did before he arrived in Boston.

His Bob Gibson-like performance in Game 6 of the 2003 World Series -- a complete-game five-hit shutout on short rest at Yankee Stadium -- gave the Marlins the title over the Yankees. It didn't eliminate the pain of the Red Sox' agonizing loss to the Yankees in the ALCS, but it did dull it a bit.

Sometimes it's hard to believe that's the same guy. Beckett's performance had too many peaks and valleys during his six-plus seasons here during which he went 89-58 with a 4.17 ERA overall. A year after Matt Clement started Game 1 of a postseason series, he was brought in to be the young ace the Sox lacked, and occasionally he fulfilled that promise of the golden-armed former No. 2 overall pick who was anointed the next Clemens and carried himself as if that baseball destiny was his birthright.

His 2011 season was permanently stained by September, but by some measures it was also the best he had in Boston statistically. It doesn't feel that way, but he was very good until relatively recently

It's telling -- and entirely his doing -- that we won't remember him well, at least not until the more recent memories of ineffectiveness and arrogance fade.

* * *

A week ago, I didn't think Bobby Valentine would be back with the Red Sox in 2013. I do now, though I still do not think he should be. I'm going to stick with my mantra: He makes every potentially controversial situation worse with his incurable passive-aggressiveness, and that is poison in a market such as this one.

The Red Sox will be entering a true bridge year next season, methodically filling in the gaps on the roster while waiting for the gems of the farm system to arrive and establish themselves. While I've probably undersold their pitching in recent columns -- I'm starting to believe Lackey can be better than decent next year now that he's healthy -- it would be stunning if they are in contention when the days start getting longer.

So in that bridge year -- man, I've always disliked that term since Theo's original intent was misconstrued, but it really does apply now -- I suspect the Red Sox' thinking will be that they might as well keep Valentine around, perhaps as a bridge himself to the next manager. He has one year left on his deal. So does Blue Jays manager John Farrell.

If the Red Sox covet Farrell as much as it is believed, the succession plan would line up nicely, bringing him here just as the team is beginning to ascend again. That might be a cold and callous way to end Valentine's time here, but I'd argue his tenure never should have begun in the first place.

* * *

I like him as a role player, and I like him as a personality, but I'm not sure I like the idea of Cody Ross sticking around on anything more than a two-year deal for, say, $14 million.

Now stay turned as I talk myself into giving him more years and loot if that's what it takes.

According to baseball-reference.com, Ross's most similar player is Kevin Mench, and his most similar player through age 30 is Craig Monroe. Like journeymen Mench and Monroe in their day, he's a player just capable enough that you're generally cool with keeping him around for 450 or so at-bats a season until you can find someone better.

But there are secondary circumstances that work in Ross's favor when it comes to remaining in Boston. He's back to pummeling lefthanded pitching this season (.330, 1.130 OPS this year in 117 plate appearances), and the notion that his swing was tailor-made for Fenway has proven true (.312, 13 homers in 226 plate appearances).

Considering the deficiencies that exist in their lineup currently and probably will into next season, keeping around a player who is a good fit in the ballpark as well as the clubhouse (if not quite cavernous right field, where he is a Pembertonian adventure) isn't the a foolish idea, though it would be better if they could do it without spending too much of that Beckett/Crawford/Gonzalez windfall.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I don't know the precise moment you were cool with this deal of such massive magnitude that it made Nomar-to-the-Cubs look like an afterthought in agate type. But it seems that for most of us it happened a half a nanosecond after picking up our collective jaw from the floor and repeating, "You mean it's Beckett and Crawford and Gonzalez? And the Dodgers are picking up most of the tab? Holy cow, I don't care if all the Sox are getting in return is Manny Mota, Ivan DeJesus Sr. and Jr., and a used Magic Johnson Lakers practice jersey, get it done.''

For me, the necessity of it was crystallized when I saw the picture. Yeah, that one. The one of a grinning Nick Punto -- the designated spare part, destined to be forgotten when the deal is discussed and dissected years from now -- and smiling Adrian Gonzalez and an absolutely beaming Josh Beckett on the chartered jet en route to Los Angeles.

They can set up all the Twitter accounts they want thanking the fans of Boston, but that picture was all the evidence I need that they couldn't wait to swap coasts. If you told me that was Beckett's first smile since the 2007 postseason, I might believe you. A fresh start was needed for all, except for possibly Punto, who was probably just happy the other guys didn't make him take the photo.

It's encouraging that the consensus around baseball is that the Red Sox, beyond the staggering we're-blowin'-it-up boldness of the nine-player blockbuster with the Dodgers, made a good deal baseball-wise, not that they'll gain much from it now.

James Loney is a placeholder, and if you thought Gonzalez was a first baseman with waning power, wait until you get a load of this perennial underachiever. DeJesus Jr. may one day grow up to be Pedro Ciriaco. Jerry Sands is an interesting power prospect who hasn't done much with his opportunities at the big league level so far. I look at the big numbers he put up at hitter-friendly Albuquerque the past two years and wonder whether his ceiling is anything more than the next Mike Marshall. Allen Webster and Rubby De La Rosa are very promising young pitchers, and while a dude named Rubby always has a head-start on being a fan favorite, all young arms are lottery tickets.

Oh, and did we mention they whacked $270-something million worth of payroll? It's been nearly 48 hours since reports of this deal broke -- well, that escalated quickly -- and it's still tough to wrap your head around all of the various elements of the thing. I like it and I hate it and I like it and I can't stop thinking about it, you know?

But in the enthusiasm for this trade and the general "good riddance, we needed a fresh start" vibe, I do hope Sox fans recognize what's ahead and get acquainted with something that is habitually unfamiliar around here -- patience. You thought 2010, with awesome Adrian Beltre doing his rental-player thing at third base en route to an 89-win season, was a bridge year? Wait until you get a look at 2013 -- now that will be a bridge year, when the lineup is dotted with stopgaps while the organization waits for Xander Bogaerts and Jackie Bradley Jr. and Matt Barnes and Sands and Webster to arrive on Yawkey Way.

The best prospects are still a level or two -- and probably a few bumps in the road -- away, and you never can be sure who will make it and who will won't. Consider: Five years ago, the Dodgers' top five prospects according to Baseball America were, in order, Andy LaRoche (currently at Pawtucket), Clayton Kershaw (one of baseball's best pitchers), Scott Elbert (a quality lefty reliever), Loney, and Tony Abreu (Royals roster filler). The Red Sox' top 10 the same year included Jacoby Ellsbury and Clay Buchholz, but also Bryce Cox, Kris Johnson, Craig Hansen, and Michael Bowden. The Red Sox got some nice prospects in this deal, but right now, that's all they are. You just do not know whether they will ever matter. You don't.

I don't think it's taking a negative approach to suggest that this is not going to be a very good team for at least a couple of years, and I wonder if in the eagerness to extricate the Beckett tumor whether this is completely apparent yet. There are no obvious solutions in free agency. The best hitter, Josh Hamilton, is extraordinarily talented, but he's about as durable as J.D. Drew, and his well-documented demons make him about as high-risk, high-reward as a free agent could possibly be. And the best pitcher, Zack Greinke, has social-anxiety disorder and has had recent hiccups in the American League. After burning all of that cash on the Lackeys and Crawfords and Jenkses, the Red Sox are going to be in the business of sure-things and fiscal prudence going forward. But that's just as well -- Hamilton and Greinke will probably both sign with the Dodgers anyway.

The daydream of having a mostly home-grown roster is a pleasant one, but it's not feasible for a big-market team that expects to contend every year, which is what the Red Sox' goal has been and should continue to be. Signing big-ticket free agents or making blockbuster trades should not be abandoned just because Crawford and Gonzalez didn't live up to their salaries for whatever reason. Or were too busy cheering to notice that not a single member of the Red Sox' 2004 starting lineup and starting rotation was originally drafted and developed by the franchise? [Trot Nixon played just 48 games that year.] I don't know, that group seemed pretty likable. The Red Sox must spend in free agency, and spend big in certain cases. They just have to spend it on the right players. We'll find out now whether Ben Cherington is up to that challenge.

We'll like anyone -- even ex-Yankees -- around here if they perform. And I believe that's going to be a rude awakening next year for those among us who are sick of this entitled 2012 group saying that they want a likable group of players to root for more than anything else. You can have friendly Cody Ross and smiling Mike Aviles and skinny Pedro Ciriaco out there, and they'll try their best, but the W-L results probably aren't going to be any better than they are this year. And that will get old.

You'll wonder where the talent has gone and when it will get here. This is going to require patience, and it's going to require getting used to certain things, such as not being anywhere near an equal to the Yankees, Angels, Rangers and Rays in the standings or in terms of talent. The Red Sox are an elite franchise in a huge market, but they're not going to be an elite team with huge win totals for at least a couple of years. Being the semi-scrappy sort-of-upstart might be fun for a while, but it's disappointing that it came to this. It's almost unfathomable that they won a World Series just five years ago.

And please, a request: unless you're Bob Lobel and it's your go-to shtick, please resist any temptation to yelp "why can't we get guys like that?" whenever Gonzalez, who you know will be rejuvenated in LA, hits a three-run bomb. I know people were down on Gonzalez (in part, I will argue, because Manny Ramirez set the bar so high for so many years on what an elite slugger should be), and he wasn't exactly bursting with charisma, but he's a wonderful hitter who is having a down year. The Red Sox will have a very difficult time replacing him, and don't tell me he wasn't a good fit in this market, because some among us were saying he's the best Sox hitter since Ted Williams two months into his tenure here. Why can't we get guys like that? You had him, and you wanted him gone.

We'll wonder why it didn't work according to the plan drawn up in December 2010, with Crawford and Ellsbury and Dustin Pedroia at the top of the lineup and Gonzalez batting them in time and again. It will be fascinating to see whether Crawford, who is the whole key to whether this deal will ultimately be judged as good or bad, looks like his Tampa Bay self when he returns next year. I bet he exhales and excels in L.A.

Hell, maybe even Beckett will be useful. I don't think he has the stuff to pull off a rejuvenation in L.A. similar to what A.J. Burnett has done in Pittsburgh, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that he sticks it to the Sox one last time by pitching well elsewhere. That would be just like him.

Oh, right, and there's Punto, too, the bystander in the picture and the trade that became instant Red Sox lore, rattling Fenway to its core. He's a nice guy, played hard, and didn't perform particularly well, which when you think about, might just turn out to be the bridge-year motto for the team he and his L.A.-loving pals left behind.

Be sure to stop by our always above-.500 chat, during which we'll discuss how to salvage the Red Sox for 2013, what to keep an eye on when the Patriots take on the Bucs, and the usual media matters. Bring along a root beer Italian ice and check in below to join the fun.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

I don't know whether Dustin Pedroia honestly likes Bobby Valentine or loathes him, though it's probably a safe guess that the truth falls somewhere on the latter half of that wide spectrum in between.

I think we all know that he misses his boss/buddy Tito and resents how his departure went down, though apparently he at least is willing shoot the breeze in the dugout with Valentine for what looks like a barely disguised all-is-well, nothing-to-see-here photo op.

Also, I do know this for sure:

If you're taking Valentine's side over Pedroia's, I've got to question not only what you've been watching the previous five years, but whether you were watching at all.

Of all of the maddening story lines and plot twists surrounding this team's ongoing tribute to last September, the most frustrating has been the backlash against Pedroia. I recognize that he hasn't been perfect, that his "that's not the way we do things here'' comment after Valentine questioned Kevin Youkilis's commitment was a poorly-chosen string of words.

Beyond that, the perception that the inmates are running the asylum irks fans as much as when a player making an eight-figure salary cadillacs it on a ground ball, and so his image was dented further when he was fingered as a ringleader and featured speaker at the now-infamous "No Bobby V Allowed" meeting in New York.

It's fair to presume his contributions were somewhat harsher than suggesting that candle sticks would make a lovely parting gift for the passive-aggressive manager.

Yes, Pedroia has made some missteps this season. But I'd argue that they're the first he's made since his rookie-of-the-year, championship-winning, introducing-Jeff-Francis-to-the-laser-show breakthrough in 2007, and doesn't that count for something? Shouldn't the reservoir of goodwill he has built up during his time here count for a lot? Pedroia's approach to the game -- the way he plays, the way he produces, the way he conducts himself as a teammate -- has been as close to a fan's ideal as any Red Sox player since ... well, since Nomar Garciaparra's heyday.

Obviously, the Nomar parallel is not a perfect one, but don't tell me it hasn't crossed your mind lately, especially since we've been reminded during the eulogies for and reminiscences of Johnny Pesky that the admiration was mutual among the pair of great Red Sox shortstops. If you were on board with this team in the late-'90s, when it felt like Pedro, Nomar and 23 role players against the Yankee juggernaut, you require no reminder of just how beloved he was.

It changed because he became injury-prone, the bitterness and paranoia that he often masked when the red light was on seeped into the public consciousness, and his shocking midseason departure in 2004 is remembered as a catalyst for the magic that would take place that October. It should have ended better for him here, and it was mostly his fault that it didn't.

If Pedroia is someday traded because, like Nomar before him, the Red Sox general manager doesn't believe he'll be durable going forward, well, that might be able to comprehend. He's had his share of serious injuries in recent years, and given that he knows no other way to play but all-out, all the time, a decline in his early 30s would not be a shock.

But wanting him traded because he's had some issues with a manager who should not be here beyond this year and probably should not have been here in the first place, that's just nuts. Pedroia is not Nomar. He's not going to pout during a crucial game in New York. That's not who he is, and maybe I spent too much time listening to sports radio -- I do spend too much time listening to sports radio -- but it's downright dumbfounding that a reminder is necessary. If anything, his frustration stems from the same place yours does -- he wants this franchise to knock off the nonsense and the losing and get back to how it used to be, when championships were the priority.

I'm curious whether Dan Shaughnessy's column Tuesday, where he essentially let Pedroia tell his side of things, improves his current public perception. Pedroia said the right things, and I have no doubt he was sincere when he said, "It’s been difficult. But our fans are smart. I’m sure they understand. They know what kind of guy I am. They should."

They should. But if any of them would choose Bobby V. over Pedroia for no other reason than that you're supposed to respect your boss, as wrong for this situation as he may be, they don't.

Even during this miserable season in which just about everyone of any previous status is complicit, it's ridiculous that a reminder is necessary regarding all that Pedroia has done right.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Columnist

Back from London, and unlike the Red Sox ownership group that apparently prefers sequestering over there save for an occasional detour to Baltimore for a halfhearted spin session, I not only recognize that the 2012 Red Sox are hopeless but have a clear-eyed idea of what is necessary to restore faith and even a winning record in 2013.

It's quite simple, actually:

1. Dump Bobby Valentine.

2. Dump Josh Beckett.

3. Profit.

(Actually, they'll profit anyway, even with the season in a death spiral, but I figured that word might get ownership's attention. So while you're presumably here, Mr. Absentee Owner, sir, can we agree that the honorable thing to do would be to admit the sellout distribution streak is over, ditch the word "brand" from your public vocabulary, give away a few bricks instead of hawking them, stop playing "Sweet Caroline" when the Red Sox are losing, and tell Lucchino to knock off the patronizing, tone-deaf, half-offensive, half-comical letters to the fans. Even the most faithful are on to you now, and that doesn't mean Doris Kearns Goodwin and Ken Burns. Thanks for your time. Yes, you can go back to soccer now.)

For all of the nonsense -- the texting silliness that would embarrass a middle schooler, the inexcusable lack of communication between the manager and his coaches, the bizarre handling of the Carl Crawford situation -- this is not worse than 2001. The worst guy on this team would not crack the top 10 miserable jerks among that group. The core of this team is not a lost cause for the long term, as much as it is for the remainder of this season, and has been for a while. That second wild-card will be fun the day the win-or-go-home games are played, but over the course of a season it seems certain to prolong a pretender's foolish belief that it can be a contender.

The primary reason for the Red Sox' downfall from a preseason postseason favorite to an American League also-ran before August is complete is obvious, and it's not so much the relentless ration of injuries or a manager who is a decent tactician with an eye for talent and an atrocious fit in every other way.

It's that multiple players with track records as star-caliber performers have had down years or been downright awful. You know about the every-fifth-day-misery from alleged co-aces Jon Lester and Josh Beckett, but the offense isn't innocent in all of this, either. Dustin Pedroia's OPS is 62 points lower than his career worst of .819 in 2009. Jacoby Ellsbury's slugging percentage is down more than 200 points from last year. Adrian Gonzalez, with an .833 OPS, 15 homers, and a 118 adjusted OPS, is having a season similar to Kevin Youkilis in 2007 (.843, 16 homers, 117 OPS+). That's good, but not good enough.

Pedroia, Ellsbury and Gonzalez were in the top eight in MVP voting last year. It will be a surprise and a mistake if a stray vote is earned among the three of them this year.

I can't come up with any reason other than rotten coincidence that their most proven players, save for David Ortiz, have let them down. The Red Sox don't have a player with a bWAR higher than 2.7, which is the threshold Gonzalez, Pedroia and Ortiz all are stranded at right now. Logic suggests that with reasonable health Gonzalez, Pedroia and Ellsbury, in that order, will be better a season from now, just as they were better a season ago.

It's tempting to want to napalm this whole frustrating team, or at least its core, but that's just not realistic, nor is it smart. You're better off betting that those players do bounce back rather than trading them off at bottom dollar.

There are already encouraging signs that things will be better. Gonzalez is hitting .369 with a 1.065 OPS in the second half, Lester has a 0.98 WHIP and 33 strikeouts in his last 33.2 innings over five starts, Pedroia has a .900 OPS over the last month, Carl Crawford showed more flashes of his dynamic Tampa Bay self during his 31 games this year (while playing through an injury, no less) than he did all of last season ... good things, all of them, and hopefully hints of good things to come.

If not for the relative intrigue of watching the likes of Ryan Lavarnway, Jose Iglesias (call him up already), and Franklin Morales over the next 40 games, you almost wish they could abandon this season now and get started on the new one immediately.

Of course, there are a couple of other people they need to abandon first, starting with one former core player who has become a malignancy. Josh Beckett simply cannot return. He is the declining, stubborn, publicly indifferent face of everything that has gone wrong for this franchise since September 2011. It will not be easy to discard him, because of his salary, his 10-5 rights, his declining stuff, and the self-inflicted damage to his reputation, but it must happen, and here's hoping Ben Cherington has the green light and the savvy to make it happen.

They shouldn't worry about him rejuvenating himself elsewhere, whether that's with the Texas Rangers or the Sugar Land Skeeters, because cutting him out of this clubhouse is necessary for a fresh start. For someone who was essential to a championship just five years ago, it's disappointing that it has to end this way, but then, disappointing is a word that is permanently attached to Beckett's time here. He's had moments of greatness, but based on his ability, he's an underachiever. Consider: His most similar player from ages 27 to 31 is Kevin Millwood. I'd rather have Kevin Millwood. Get Beckett lost.

The same goes for the manager. Bobby Valentine has his strengths -- it must reflect on him somewhat that so many secondary players have thrived -- but whatever he brings to the dugout is negated by his incredible and possibly intentional knack for making every situation worse.

His habitual sarcasm and "accidental" word choices -- such as referring to Bob McClure's time away as a vacation, or revealing various details of Crawford's status that put the outfielder on the spot -- happen so often that you have to believe it is always intentional. The feuds with his coaches are and were absurd, and the notion that he's a tough manager was disproved yet again, just as it was with the 2002 Mets. He's not a tough manager. He's a passive-aggressive one who backs down when his calculated offhanded comments cause a stir.

You can't be no-nonsense when you're creating half of the nonsense yourself. If McClure's firing is a sign that Valentine will be back, at the least as a bridge to John Farrell, then whatever optimism that exists for next season has to be tempered by the knowledge that even when things are going well, the manager will turn brush-fires into blazes, disingenuously pleading, "who, me?" at every controversial turn.

In areas where it makes sense, the Red Sox are desperate for change. Valentine never will, and getting rid of the manager who was supposed to signal a fresh start but who only made it all worse is the first step. If he somehow takes Beckett with him when he goes, it would instantly become the best thing he's done during his time here.

During our always-shredding chat, we discussed the resurgent Red Sox, the Celtics' acquisition of Courtney Lee, and the usual media matters. Check in below to relive the fun.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Staff

So here's a telling little statistical discovery I stumbled upon this morning, one that emphasizes not only what a disappointment Jon Lester has been this season, but reminds us that for a couple of years the belief that he would and could be a true No. 1 starter was anything but a daydream.

He's no longer the active leader in the major leagues in winning percentage.

It's a distinction he has held since he qualified with his 100th career decision last year, but it's something he was on track to achieve pretty much from the advent of his big league career in 2006.

He was 11-2 after two seasons with the Red Sox, 27-8 after three, 42-16 after four ... and he entered this year at 76-34, for a damn impressive .691 winning percentage.

But with yet another mystifying, joyless and dismal performance Tuesday night -- he allowed six earned runs in four innings during a 7-5 loss to the White Sox to drop to 5-7 this season -- he backed right out of the top spot on that list.

He was surpassed by Roy Halladay, who on the same night was earning a no-decision in his first start since May 27. Lester is now at .6639 (81 wins, 41 losses), while Halladay, who is just 4-5 himself this season, is at .6644 (192-97). It's probably only a matter of time before they're both passed by the brilliant and unsung Jered Weaver (.660, 93-48 career, 11-1 this year).

(This is where I remind you that Pedro Martinez's winning percentage with the Red Sox was .760., with 117 wins and 37 losses. That's 80 games over .500 in 154 decisions. There will never be another.)

While run support and good fortune obviously are significant in a pitcher's won-lost record -- Lester's 11-2 mark in 2006-07 was accompanied by a 4.68 ERA -- his tremendous record was a fair representation of how well he pitched for the vast majority of his career.

The collective frustration regarding his current performance has led to proclamations blending anger and revisionist history. I'm as guilty as anyone, snidely tweeting last night that the Red Sox are sending the wrong lefty to the bullpen, a reference to the decision to at least temporarily remove intriguing Franklin Morales from the rotation while Lester continues to hold the season hostage with his momentum-halting performances. He's supposed to be the ace, and right now he has five wins -- as many as Daniel Bard.

We hear a lot now about how Lester was never a true ace and never will be, that he'll never be anything resembling what CC Sabathia is to the Yankees or David Price to the Rays. But the truth is that he already has been their peer -- and while maybe it feels like a long time ago right now, it wasn't.

From 2008-10, Lester ranked fourth, third and third among American League pitchers in baseball-reference.com's version of WAR. He struck out 225 batters in both 2009 and 2010. During the latter of those two seasons, he won 19 games, was fourth in the league in hits per nine (7.2) and was tops in strikeouts per nine (9.7). Some may not have recognized him as such, but he was an ace.

Why he is no longer, at age 28 and the height of his athletic prime, is mystery that puzzles even pitching experts such as Dennis Eckersley. There are the theories -- he threw too many cutters and it cost him velocity on his fastball, he melts down after calls he disagrees with, he no longer enjoys pitching in Boston (he has a 6.29 home ERA this season, 3.66 for his career).

If you're not alarmed enough by watching him contribute to making Kevin Youkilis's homecoming a wild success, consider this: Lester's adjusted ERA is 90 this season. In 1992, Matt Young had a 92 ERA+. In 1998, Steve Avery had a 94 ERA+. Now, my memory isn't as crisp as it used to be, but I do not believe those particular pitchers are remembered fondly around here.

I do believe Lester will be, and the man did build up a cachet of goodwill and great memories before last September. He's losing too many ugly decisions lately, and he's lost that statistical distinction. But it's much too soon to start thinking about Jon Lester as a lost cause.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Staff

David Ortiz has been everything Adrian Gonzalez was supposed to this season, picking up the slugging slack in the middle of the order while Gonzalez offered his bizarre nightly homage to Lyle Overbay for a couple of months.

So we wonder: Is it possible that Monday night's satisfying 5-1 victory over the White Sox, which featured the returns of Kevin Youkilis, Carl Crawford, and Gonzalez's home-run stroke, stands as a harbinger that the favor is about to be returned?

Gonzalez mashed the winning three-run homer in the eighth inning, a cathartic blast that has been overdue since the frustrating early spring. But the celebration was collectively exhilarating only for a moment. Ortiz came up limping rounding second base -- what is it with this franchise and injuries on home runs? -- and so as one slugger apparently returned, another departed, hobbling down the dugout steps while his manager wore a concerned look that actually appeared sincere.

We'll find out soon enough whether Ortiz will miss anything more than a couple of games. It appears there's no reason to fear the worst, but the way this season as gone for the Red Sox, it's probably wise to wait for confirmation before exhaling. (Confirmation: No rupture, no tear, and he says he'll probably miss a week. Commence breathing.)

It will require a longer stretch before concluding whether Gonzalez's home run last night, which was so encouraging in that he went the opposite way and hit if off a lefty and FINALLY HIT A HOME RUN, is an indication that he's found his way back to being the elite slugger who hit 165 homers over the five previous seasons.

His power outage -- just seven homers so far, or 10 fewer than Jarrod Saltalamacchia -- has been so puzzling and prolonged that it's easy to forget how sensational he was during his first half-season with the Red Sox. I don't expect those of you who completely dismissed Manny Ramirez and exclaimed during those heady May 2011 times that Gonzalez is the finest Red Sox hitter since Ted Williams to admit it now, but you know who you are.

He was awesome. During the first half of the 2011 season, Gonzalez hit .354 with a 1.006 OPS, 17 homers, and 77 RBIs. He belted nine home runs in May, batted .373 in June, and was the most valuable player in the league to that point if Toronto's Jose Bautista was not. He could play in Boston, can play in Boston, and please, can we stop speculating and stroking our own provincial egos around here by suggesting that a player's underwhelming performance is the manifestation of this hardscrabble, discerning fan base?

Red Sox fans are knowledgeable, but it's not an entirely separate subsection that also caterwauls "Sweet Caroline" in the eighth inning, come hell or a blown nine-run lead to the Yankees. We ain't that intimidating, Sully. Sometimes, good players have bad years for a variety of reasons. Yaz dropped from 40 homers and a .329 average in 1970 to 15/.254 in '71. Wade Boggs, who could bat .340-something while masterminding Delta Force, hit .259 in '92. It happens.

It's not happening to Ortiz, of course. He's having a vintage year even by the high standards he's set during his -- has it really been this long? -- 10 seasons in Boston. He had a 1.013 OPS in the first half, slightly higher than Gonzalez's heading into the All-Star break a year ago, and he's currently at .312 with 23 homers and 58 RBIs.

Starting pitching was the primary culprit in the Red Sox' mediocre first half, with the offense (5.0 runs per game, second only to Texas) feasting in blowouts but generally doing its job. But had Ortiz not produced in a way Gonzalez was expected to but could not, chances are there would be many more significant gripes about the offense.

Where would the Red Sox be without him? Maybe it's a sign that things are starting to go right for this team, despite Ortiz's emotional "We're cursed'' declaration Monday, that we won't have to find out beyond a few games.

Instead, Red Sox fans can share this reasonable daydream: That Ortiz and Gonzalez begin tearing the cover off the ball at the same time, and their currently congested playoff chances begin to look legitimate.

It has been such a weird, mystifying season for Gonzalez. His walk rate, once as high as 17.5 percent in a single season, is down to 6.1 percent this year, and a player who once walked 119 times in a season went 24 games without drawing a single base on balls. Some scouts said he was pressing and would snap out of it, while others suggested he was struggling to get around on the fastball, a pitch he mauled to the tune of a .354 average last year. And the strangest sight of all? Watching him roaming around right field for 18 games.

I'm optimistic that we'll see the version of Gonzalez that was so familiar to Padres fans for five years, though not all indicators point to a full recovery of ... well, of whatever was missing. He's hitting .400 in July ... with a .400 on-base percentage, with no walks in 40 plate appearances. Right now, his 2012 season is essentially statistically average -- he has a 100 OPS+, stuck in the middle with the likes of Logan Morrison, Yonder Alonso, and David DeJesus.

At the least, Monday's homer is the best piece of evidence yet that he's trending toward better company.

@GlobeChadFinn

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Staff

Ten free minutes for me, 10 free throwaway lines for you ...

1. I suppose the five hits he has in nine at-bats since his return to the lineup has served as a reminder, but I thought not enough was made of Jacoby Ellsbury's absence and the effect it had on the Red Sox. Based on MVP balloting, he was the best offensive player in the league last season, and his numbers (212 hits, 32 homers, 46 doubles, 39 stolen bases, .928 OPS) stand as a historically great season. Future NL-pinch-hitter-extraordinaire Daniel Nava filled in beyond expectations in Ellsbury and Carl Crawford's absence, and Scott Podsednik had his moments, but the Red Sox also had to endure 268 mostly fruitless at-bats from Marlon Byrd, Darnell McDonald, and Ryan Kalish while biding their time until the varsity (copyright Larry Lucchino) returned. Seeing Ellsbury back at the top of the lineup makes it easier to have optimism about this team without searching too hard for it.

2. A three-run homer every once in a while would be swell, but any grievances regarding Adrian Gonzalez should stop well shy of suggesting he's jaking it by missing games due to illness and a back issue recently. He's a player who prides himself of being in there every day -- the fewest games he's played any season among the previous five is 159. He may be a disappointment, but he's not a malingerer.

3. One way to kill time before the start of Patriots camp, which can't get here soon enough: Stare at the depth chart, rattle off the names, and marvel at the talent Tom Brady will have at his disposal this season in the passing game alone: Rob Gronkowski, Wes Welker, Aaron Hernandez, Brandon Lloyd, Jabar Gaffney, Deion Branch, Donte' Stallworth, Julian Edelman, as well as Danny Woodhead out of the backfield. There will be attrition, of course, and someone like Stallworth may not even make the cut. The passing game probably won't be as productive as the record-setting Randy Moss/Wes Welker fireworks show of 2007, but it will be able to torment a defense in more ways.

4. As far as the running backs beyond Woodhead are concerned, you have to figure Stevan Ridley, who suffered from acute fumbleitis late in his rookie season, will pick up most of BenJarvus Green-Ellis's carries, presuming he spent the offseason carrying a football everywhere he went like Darnell Jefferson in the "The Program.'' I can't envision Joseph Addai being anything more than the new Fred Taylor. Shane Vereen, whose rookie season was lost from the beginning, is my sleeper. The kid is electric in the open field.

5. Bruins one-timer: I'm probably in the minority on this, but I'd rather trade Milan Lucic than David Krejci in a deal for Anaheim's Bobby Ryan or another top-shelf forward. As enigmatic as Krejci can be -- he reminds me of Rajon Rondo in that regard to some degree -- he also has a track record of playing his best when the spotlight is brightest. But if it's Krejci or Lucic and Dougie Hamilton, forget it.

6. The theory that he was having ex-Celtics Remorse is interesting, and Ray Allen was certainly subdued at his introductory press conference (perhaps he was expecting a house DJ and maybe some pyrotechnics?) but it's hard for me to figure anyone going to Miami for millions of dollars to play with LeBron James is going to be bummed about much of anything for long.

7. As you probably can imagine, I can't get over the story about the haul of rare baseball cards found in someone's attic in Ohio. It's every baseball fan's daydream. Or a fan of loot and money, for that matter. I spent hours as a kid scouring my grandmother's attic trying to find my dad's extensive collection of '50s baseball cards, with not a trace of vintage '52 cardboard to be found. We all have a similar story, don't we? I can tell you this: Those cards, estimated to be bring $3 million if they are sold or auctioned, will go for a lot more than that. I'd bet double.

8. So assuming that Andrew Bailey returns to the Red Sox while the games still matter this season, is he the closer immediately, does he have to prove himself in a setup role first, or has Alfredo Aceves done enough to keep it? I'm leaning toward the latter, though there are fantasy baseball biases at play there.

9. Brent Lillibridge has a minus-33 OPS+ in 16 plate appearances for the Red Sox. It's a puny sample-size to be sure, but I look at his career 67 OPS+ in 600 at-bats -- not a puny sample size -- and I find myself hoping that the Red Sox don't ditch Ryan Sweeney to keep Lillibridge around, even considering his speed and defensive prowess. For some noodle-bat perspective, Craig Grebeck had a minus-55 OPS+ during his 43 plate-appearances with the Red Sox in 2001, while Cesar Crespo put up a beastly minus-4 OPS+ in 79 plate appearances in 2003.

10. As for today's Completely Random Baseball Card:

Still waiting for Lucchino's report on how "cheerful" he was after Bobby Valentine called him out for a lackadaisical defensive play Sunday.

During our Friday chat (always a league-leader in bronze plaques and commemorative displays!), we discussed the start of the second half, Larry Lucchino's tone-deaf letter, whether the Red Sox can overcome their clubhouse issues, Ray Allen's subdued farewell, and the usual media matters. Bring along a crabmeat roll and a root beer and check in below to relive the fun.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Staff

I've often said that Dennis Eckersley is the best baseball studio analyst around, and I don't mean just in Boston. (ESPN hired John Kruk over him years ago. Let that one percolate for a minute.) His candor is unmatched, which has made him less than popular with several Red Sox players through the years, and the cool part is that he doesn't care, which is kind of extraordinary for an ex-player. He has the rare cachet of a Hall of Famer, something NESN is wise to promote, but his genuine, relatable passion is the reason you always hope he's in the studio after a big win, a tough loss, or pretty much everything in between.

So, yeah, it was fun to have the Eck as our guest on the Red Sox podcast this week, joining yours truly and host Daigo Fujiwara. The Eck is as insightful as ever, though he's also mystified by some of the first-half failings, including Jon Lester's regression and Adrian Gonzalez's lack of home run power. Give it a listen.

Subscribe to the podcast via iTunes. Find its archive here.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Staff

... in his book that don't relate to drugs or Wade Boggs.

1. [Quoting his father, whose viewpoint he seems to share] Jackie Robinson was a modern-day Shaka Zulu -- he was the King who sold his own people into slavery -- so all Jackie did was sell us to Major League Baseball the same way. (pg. 28)

2. [On getting passed over for Bruce Hurst as the starter for Game 7 of the 1986 World Series] Bruce would tell you right now that I would have won that ballgame. I was a better pitcher than he was. I didn't pitch behind him in the rotation. He pitched behind me. (pg. 85)

3. If I was talking to [Josh] Beckett -- and he would listen to me -- I'd make him a great pitcher overnight. Not a really good pitcher, a great pitcher. He'd go out there overnight and turn unhittable. And if he let me call pitches from the dugout, he'd throw a no-hitter. (pg. 135)

4. Best teammate I ever had was Eddie Jurak. (pg. 137)

5. Ellis Burks was not a better baseball player than Lee Graham. (pg. 149)

6. Ellis Burks was not a better baseball player than Chico Walker. (pg. 149)

7. Sammy Stewart -- can't get a better guy. (pg. 167)

8. Wes Gardner -- can't get a better guy. (pg. 167)

9. It astounded me when I met Johnny Pesky. He knew the dap handshake, the whole soul-brother handshake, tapping on your and and all that. (pg. 158)

10. [On Bill Lee] Right now, at 65 years old, he could walk out there in the major leagues and he could do what Jamie Moyer did. (pg. 167)

Actually, I completely buy that one. And the one about Pesky, too.

I'm not sure whether to file "They Call Me Oil Can'' under fiction or non-fiction, and The Can, as memorable and charismatic as he was, isn't accountable for much of anything.

It's not "Ball Four'' or Dirk Hayhurst's "The Bullpen Gospels,'' but it's a fairly enjoyable read.

By Chad Finn, Boston.com Staff

Welcome to the third edition of Red Sox power rankings, a wide-ranging excuse to write about the best and worst performers of the previous month as a new one begins. (This is about the 15-12 Red Sox of June. Today is July 1. It's complicated, but you'll get it!) The only rule of the power rankings is that there are no rules to the power rankings. Media members, prospects, front-office personnel, Ed Jurak, even your favorite sausage vendor are almost as liable to be ranked as the current players themselves. It's a measure of the exceptional and the unacceptable, with the middle ground unacknowledged. The top five are ranked; the bottom five are not since our pool of candidates is innumerable. Let's get to the rankings, which this month includes one player who has just arrived at Double A.

TOP FIVE
1. Franklin Morales
Lefthanded compliment
Well now, what do we have here? Based on ability, stuff, and recent results, the answer could be this: something special. Morales, the 26-year-old lefthander with a 95-mph fastball and a power curve, was once one baseball's best pitching prospects while coming up in the Rockies organization, ranking among guys named Kershaw, Price, Chamberlain and Buchholz. He started out brilliantly, pitching 20 consecutive scoreless innings in 2007, but command issues led to him stagnating with the Rockies, and he was sold to the Red Sox last May. He'd been decent as a reliever during his year with the Sox when, a couple of weeks ago, attrition in the rotation gave him an opportunity to start. And how he has seized it. In three starts and 18 innings, he's allowed four earned runs while striking out 24 and walking three. In his most recent start, he went pitch-for-pitch with Mariners ace Felix Hernandez, pitching seven shutout innings.He's been a revelation, and while it may be getting ahead