The debate has been going on ever since the Sox sent Jon
Lester out west. The fire was fueled more recently by comments by Cherington
saying that an ace is nice to have, but wasn’t going to be the sole focus of
this team. That sounds like a pretty sound strategy to me. But, it didn’t stop
the questions. What are the Sox going to do next year without an ace?
My favorite part of that question is that it’s the first
time that I’ve almost universally heard Lester referred to as an ace. But,
that’s another matter.
Or, is it?
I guess this whole thing hinges on what you call an ace.
Does every team have an ace? Personally, I say no. Sure, everyone has an ace of
their staff. For instance, the Sox ace right now is probably Clay Buchholz. But,
in every five man ranking, someone has to be on top. Even if only by default. That
doesn’t make Clay an “ace.” In the last 20 years or so, I’d say the Sox have
only had one ace. Unless you count Beckett for one season…or maybe just the
postseason. To me when your ace pitches, you expect to win. When Pedro pitched,
I expected the Sox to win. When Pedro got a lead, he didn’t give it up. If the
Sox lost four in a row, the streak ended with Pedro. You almost didn’t have to
watch the game, unless it was to see what record he might set. Contrast that
with someone like Curt Schilling, or Lester himself. When they pitched, I knew
the Sox had a good shot. Depending on the opposing pitcher, maybe a really good
shot. Curt would keep the Sox in the game and give them a chance to win. With
Pedro? I didn’t care who the opposing pitcher was. Pedro didn’t keep the Sox in
the game. He kept the opposing team out of the game.
So, can the Sox win the World Series without an ace? Of
course. They just did it last year. The Giants have done it a couple times. Is
it better if you have an ace? Absolutely. But, as Cherington pointed out, you
need the rest of the team too.
Remember Pedro’s glory years? The Pedro-Saberhagen led
rotation? Pedro was such an ace that he almost carried those teams to the World
Series himself. Almost. But, he needed a team around him. Even Pedro. In those
years, I often wondered if teams were better off in the playoffs throwing their
worst pitchers against Pedro. He was going to lose anyway. Why not save their
best pitcher to actually get a win against someone else. Imagine if the Indians
had shifted Colon off Pedro.
Which is sort of what an ace-less staff would do. Say the
Sox went out this offseason and spent on a big ace. Lester, if he’s suddenly an
ace. Or Scherzer. Or whatever they can get. But, then are left with Clay and
three youngsters to finish it off. Sure, the guy at the top would win most of
his starts. But, the Sox would lose most of the others. What if, instead, the
Sox filled their staff with #2 caliber pitchers? Instead of overpaying for an
ace, they filled the entire staff with really good pitchers. As you go through
the season, you’d be facing another team’s 1-2-3-4-5 rotation, but countering
that with a 2-2-3-3-4. So, if you go on paper…1 beats 2, 2 beats 3 and so on…In
those five games, the Sox would go 3-2, assuming you split the 2-2 and 3-3
games. That’s better than 1-4.
And, that’s assuming that they go as they would on paper.
But, was John Lackey the ace of the Red Sox last season? I’m thinking “no.”
But, did he beat the aces of other teams? I’m thinking “yes.” He even took down
a couple true aces along the way in Price and Verlander. Would the
Pedro-Saberhagen rotation have been able to do that? If Pedro wasn’t facing
them? Doubt it. But, because the Sox rotation had balance instead of being
top-heavy they were able to beat three teams in the playoffs that had pitchers
who might have been true aces.
Naturally, I’m not saying the Sox would have been worse off
last year if ’99-’00 Pedro was at the top of the rotation, taking the place of
Peavy’s starts. As Cherington said, an ace is certainly something every team
would like. And, I would certainly endorse spending every cent of John Henry’s
money to get a rotation full of aces. But, since nobody has one of those at the
moment, a balanced attack might just be the way to go. It worked last year.
Why not next year?
No comments:
Post a Comment