Terry Francona doesn't use long relievers

Boof Bonser arrived in Fort Myers -- well, actually, he never really left Fort Myers -- with an eye on breaking into a Red Sox bullpen with space for just an arm like his. He's been a starting pitcher throughout his career but almost certainly won't be a starting pitcher with the Red Sox unless something goes terribly, terribly wrong.

His background as a starting pitcher, though, makes him a natural fit as a Justin Masterson-esque long reliever, a guy who can eat up three or four innings out of the bullpen in a lopsided game to preserve the bullpen for another day. The Red Sox even will stretch him out as a starter this spring so they'll have the option of using him for multiple innings once the season begins.

Here's the only problem: Terry Francona doesn't use long relievers.

Since his arrival in 2004, Francona has been less and less inclined to use relief pitchers for more than two innings at a time. When Brad Penny got shelled by the Cleveland Indians in late April, sent to the showers in the third inning, Francona used five relief pitchers to finish the game. Only Hunter Jones pitched more than one inning of relief, and even Jones was done after the fifth inning.

Granted, the Red Sox will tend to use long relievers less often because their pitchers tend to pitch deeper into games. A day Josh Beckett starts doesn't tend to be a day any relief pitcher needs to pitch more than one inning. But even comparing the Red Sox to the Yankees, another team that doesn't often need pitchers to do mop-up work, reveals a tendency to spread the workload out:

(For the sake of simplicity, a "long relief appearance" will be defined as a relief appearance lasting three innings or more. All statistics from Baseball-Reference.com's Play Index tool.)

2004
Average American League team: 16.5
Yankees long relief appearances: 16
Red Sox long relief appearances: 6

2005
Average American League team: 14.1
Red Sox long relief appearances: 9
Yankees long relief appearances: 9

2006
Average American League team: 15.1
Yankees long relief appearances: 13
Red Sox long relief appearances: 8

2007
Average American League team: 14.4
Yankees long relief appearances: 10
Red Sox long relief appearances: 3

2008
Yankees long relief appearances: 13
Average American League team: 11.8
Red Sox long relief appearances: 3

2009
Yankees long relief appearances: 19
Average American League team: 12.7
Red Sox long relief appearances: 5

In other words, Francona has asked a relief pitcher to go three or more innings less often in the last three years combined (11) than the average American League team did last season alone (12.7).

Even when he has a starting pitcher who doesn't eat up innings -- and Red Sox starters have failed to get out of the fifth inning at least 20 times in each of the last four seasons -- Francona has shown a tendency to use his relief pitchers in short stints rather than ask one or two guys to finish out the game.

Francona asked his relievers to get more than three outs in an appearance 162 times in 2005. That even was with a team whose starting pitchers averaged 6.2 innings per start, better than its starters have fared in any season since. A year later, that number had tumbled all the way down to 100. It hasn't been back above 125 yet.

Masterson, the quintessential long reliever, made only two relief appearances last season of three innings or longer:
* He relieved the injured Daisuke Matsuzaka in Oakland just a couple of weeks removed from spring training, pitching four full innings;
* He relieved Matsuzaka again in the starter's first game back from the disabled list, pitching three full innings.

That's it. Masterson made 25 relief appearances for the Red Sox before he was traded for Victor Martinez. Only two of those lasted three innings or more, and both of those were directly related to the health of Matsuzaka. Everything else was in short stints.

When a line drive knocked Jon Lester out of a game at Yankee Stadium in late September, Hunter Jones and Michael Bowden only pitched a combined 3 1/3 innings of relief before giving way to Manny Delcarmen and Ramon Ramirez. Bowden, don't forget, had spent the entire season as a starting pitcher -- but Francona only asked him to pitch 2 1/3 innings before he called for Delcarmen.

This isn't meant as a criticism. Francona certainly has earned the benefit of the doubt in his handling of his bullpen.

This simply is meant as a little perspective on what Bonser realistically is going to bring to the table for the Red Sox. The former Minnesota starter will have to earn a roster spot based on what he can do in one- or two-inning stints. His ability to eat up innings out of the bullpen might be a useful skill -- but it's not going to be put to much use in Boston.

Someone needs to talk to Tim Wakefield

Tim Wakefield again has reiterated his unwavering belief that he would open the starting rotation in the Red Sox rotation.

“I plan to be one of the five starters," he told reporters in Fort Myers on Friday. "As long as I'm healthy during spring training and there are no setbacks, when we start the season, I think I’ll be one of the five. We talked about that. I think Tito (Francona) and Theo (Epstein) and John (Farrell) all think we’re a better team with me in the rotation. I eat up innings, I do whatever it takes to help us win, and I think we agreed on that aspect."

There are three possibilities here:
1. Tito and Theo and John really do believe the Red Sox are a better team with Wakefield in the rotation than with Clay Buchholz or Daisuke Matsuzaka.
2. Tito and Theo and John are not being honest with Wakefield.
3. Tito and Theo and John have been honest with Wakefield but Wakefield chooses to make declarations with no basis in reality.

No matter how you slice it, that's not good for the team.

First things first: The Red Sox are not a better team with Wakefield in the rotation than with Buchholz or Matsuzaka. Both Buchholz and Matsuzaka have shown flashes of top-of-the-rotation potential -- especially Buchholz, who had a 2.37 ERA and a sub-.600 OPS against during a 10-start stretch in August and September.

Matsuzaka might be maddening to watch. Matsuzaka might not have lived up to expectations. The Red Sox have him under contract for three more seasons, though, and his upside far exceeds that of Wakefield. If he's healthy -- and all indications are that he is going to be healthy -- he's going to be the No. 5 starter in the rotation.

Wakefield, meanwhile, has posted an ERA over 4.50 in three of his last four seasons and hasn't had even a decent second half since 2005. He's a perfectly serviceable pitcher for a team that needs to fill out its rotation, but he's not as good as Buchholz and not appreciably better than Matsuzaka. There's no way around it: The Red Sox rotation would not be better if he replaced either Buchholz or Matsuzaka.

The only reason for the Red Sox to keep Wakefield around, it seems, is as insurance -- but he's not talking like anyone has made that clear to him. He believes he has much claim on a spot in the rotation as Josh Beckett, John Lackey or Jon Lester. One can't help but imagine problems surfacing near Opening Day if and when the 43-year-old knuckleballer finds himself on the outs.

Epstein and Francona need to have a conversation with Wakefield -- and soon. Someone needs to tell him that he's pitching for a rotation spot right now belonging to Buchholz or Matsuzaka, and not the other way around.

(There is a slim possibility that Wakefield might be correct and that one of the five rotation spots does belong to him, be it at the expense of Buchholz or Matsuzaka. Should that be the case, well, that's another discussion entirely.)

Jed Lowrie might need more time

Other than the back end of the bullpen, one could take a pretty accurate crack at what the Red Sox roster will look like on Opening Day. Jason Varitek will be the backup catcher. Mike Lowell likely will be on the disabled list or traded away. Bill Hall and Jeremy Hermida will have spots on the bench.

One of the only toss-ups is in the infield, where either Tug Hulett or Jed Lowrie likely will break camp as the utility infielder who can spell Adrian Beltre, Dustin Pedroia and Marco Scutaro once every couple of weeks apiece.

Hulett got to the plate 19 times with the Kansas City Royals last season but otherwise played most of the season at Triple-A Omaha, playing mostly second base but also a little shortstop, third base and right field. He hit .291 and OBP'ed .384 with 11 home runs and 27 doubles in just shy of 442 plate appearances.

But this doesn't have much to do with Hulett. That has to do with Lowrie and whether the Red Sox believe he could benefit more from regular playing time at Triple-A Pawtucket or whether he's ready now to take over a full-time job should something happen to Beltre, Pedroia or Scutaro.

A wrist injury limited Lowrie to a little over 175 plate appearances combined between the major leagues and minor leagues last season -- and a good chunk of those were rehab plate appearances used less for development than for strength-building. Here's how things break down for Lowrie in the upper levels of the minor leagues:

Double-A: 413 plate appearances
Triple-A: 494 plate appearances

Compare that to another doubles-hitting middle infielder who recently came up through the Red Sox system:

Double-A: 298 plate appearances
Triple-A: 733 plate appearances

In all, Dustin Pedroia played a season and a half at Triple-A Pawtucket before the Red Sox summoned him to the major leagues. He hasn't been back.

Lowrie, on the other hand, made a midseason jump to Triple-A in 2007 and then another midseason jump to the major leagues a year later, finishing with about 400 plate appearances in the process. Even then, though, he was fighting a wrist injury that wasn't resolved until his surgery at the end of April. He hasn't swung a bat without having to think about his wrist for almost two full seasons.

The guess here is that the Red Sox will have him play at least half a season at Triple-A Pawtucket to make up for lost time. He won't turn 26 years old until mid-April, but he's coming off a year in which he didn't get into any sort of rhythm. A full-time bench job this season -- and the irregular playing time that comes with it -- could stunt his development even more.

Three more months in Pawtucket might give him the at-bats he needs to be able to contribute if and when he's called upon.

Update: “You can look at this season as a rebound season, but I’m looking to have a long career. I’m not looking to just have one season,” Lowrie told reporters in Fort Myers. “Every year that I come into camp, I want to be the starting shortstop. I don’t look at it as just this year, all or nothing. I look at it as, I want to build a career. That’s why I want to make sure that I fix this and I get this right. I’m not looking at it from just a this-year standpoint.”

A logjam at the top of the order

It's almost a foregone conclusion that Marco Scutaro will hit ninth in the Red Sox lineup to create a "second leadoff hitter" effect. By hitting behind Adrian Beltre and his presumably low on-base percentage, Scutaro would become something of a table-setter for Jacoby Ellsbury and Dustin Pedroia as they, in turn, set the table for Victor Martinez and Kevin Youkilis.

(As an aside: There are those who expect Ellsbury to steal 75 or 80 bases this season. Consider, though, how often Nick Green or Alex Gonzalez got on base in front of him last season -- and compare that to how often Scutaro will get on base in front of him this season, taking away some of his opportunities.)

The best way to score runs -- short of hitting home runs, of course -- is to get guys on base, one after the other. From Scutaro straight through until Youkilis and then even David Ortiz, the Red Sox have a chance to put men on base in rapid succession and, naturally, to drive them in. Consider the CHONE projected on-base percentages for the group:

9. Scutaro, .360
1. Ellsbury, .360
2. Pedroia, .379
3. Martinez, .366
4. Youkilis, .384
5. Ortiz, .355

A natural question arises: Why wait?

Why leave Scutaro at the bottom of the batting order? Why not hit Scutaro up near the top, where his on-base percentage will be well above average even if he regresses, and get him on base as often as possible in front of Martinez and Youkilis?

Ellsbury would still hit at the top of the order. He sees himself as a leadoff hitter. Manager Terry Francona said over and over last year that the Red Sox lineup is at its best when Ellsbury is its leadoff hitter.

But Scutaro is a natural leadoff hitter himself. He hit leadoff in all 144 of his starts with the Blue Jays last season. His ability to get on base and his ability to work counts -- he saw a career-best 4.06 pitches per plate appearance last season -- makes him a better candidate for the top of the lineup than the bottom.

The natural move would be to insert Scutaro between Ellsbury and Pedroia and bump everyone down from there, creating something of a logjam of high on-base percentages at the top. It would, as Francona would say, lengthen the lineup, make it deeper and tougher and more of a challenge for opposing pitchers.

It also would be a little bit unconventional:

Ellsbury, LF
Scutaro, SS
Pedroia, 2B
Youkilis, 1B
Martinez, C
Ortiz, DH
Cameron, CF
Drew, RF
Beltre, 3B

Martinez and Youkilis could flip-flop. There's not a huge difference between them. Youkilis does have slightly better on-base and power numbers, so it makes sense in some ways to hit him ahead of Martinez.

Drew and Ortiz could flip-flop, too, though it makes sense to get the power bat of Ortiz into the middle of the lineup where it can do the most damage if and when it catches fire. Even Drew and Beltre could flip-flop, turning Drew into yet another leadoff hitter in the No. 9 spot, though it would incite of the "J.D. Drew is overrated" camp.

Drew, for what it's worth, could fit into that No. 2 spot ahead of Pedroia just as easily as Scutaro, if not more so. Drew is projected to compile an on-base percentage of .372, a number that would look awfully good in front of Pedroia, Youkilis and Martinez.

That would leave you with this:

Ellsbury, LF
Drew, RF
Pedroia, 2B
Youkilis, 1B
Martinez, C
Ortiz, DH
Cameron, CF
Beltre, 3B
Scutaro, SS

Either way, that's an unconventional lineup.

Pedroia isn't a prototypical No. 3 hitter, though it's worth pointing out he spent a week hitting cleanup two seasons ago. He OPS'ed .819 last season -- which would be above average among No. 3 hitters in the American League (.805). He's not a home run hitter, but his doubles power would be good enough with the speed on the bases in front of him.

The Red Sox have put together a lineup with six or seven hitters who could hit in the top half of the lineup. Leaving both Drew and Scutaro in the bottom third of the order doesn't seem like the best way to score runs.

What if Bard is the one who goes?

Jonathan Papelbon has made no secret during the arbitration process that he wants to get paid what he feels he is worth. Given the propensity of Theo Epstein to let his most expensive players walk -- and given the emergence of youngster Daniel Bard as an option to replace Papelbon -- many believe the Red Sox will make little effort to re-sign Papelbon and instead hand the ball to Bard after the 2011 season.

Many have speculated that the Red Sox will trade Papelbon for prospects even before he hits the open market.

Papelbon, as far as most Red Sox fans are concerned, is a lame duck closer with little chance of sticking around after he's eligible for free agency. Papelbon is going to be too expensive for his own good, or so conventional wisdom has it, and Bard has the type of young, electric arm that could make him the next elite closer in the major leagues.

What if we have it all backwards? What if Bard is the likeliest trade chip? What if Papelbon is going to get his money and is going to emerge from the bullpen to "Shipping Up To Boston" for the next 10 or 12 years?

A reporter in Fort Myers, Fla., asked Papelbon this week what he made of the perception that he was all but gone once he hit free agency.

"I think that’s the perception, that I’m going to go somewhere else, but it’s all a perception," Papelbon said. "Right now, this is the way it’s working out. It’s that simple. It’s one year at a time. It’s working out. Both sides are happy. 'Why would you try to do anything else?' is my way of thinking. Of course I’d love to be with Boston for a long term.

"But this is the way it is right now, and I’m happy going one year at a time. This is the organization I started in. This is the organization that gave me the opportunity to play major league baseball. Of course I’d love to stay here for 15 years. Right now, one year at a time is the way it’s working. I’m happy and everyone else is happy, so why not."

Bard, on the other hand, was asked about the possibility of going back to starting pitching at some point in his career. Starting pitchers, after all, tend to be more valuable than relief pitchers.

"Right now, I'm a reliever," Bard said. "The Red Sox have a lot of starting pitching. As long as I'm with the Red Sox, I'm pretty sure I'm going to be a reliever."

The "As long as I'm with the Red Sox" part of that ought to raise an eyebrow. Bard is a smart guy. He knows what he can do is valuable whether it's as a starter or as a closer. He knows he's more valuable as a starter than as a reliever but isn't going to start any games in Boston. He also has no particular ties to the Red Sox and has no more reason to sign a team-friendly contract than Papelbon does.

Papelbon, despite all appearances, is a smart guy. He knows what he can do is plenty valuable, too. Over the last few seasons, among American League closers, he's in a class with Joe Nathan and Mariano Rivera and pretty much no one else. He also knows that he has a pretty good thing going for him in Boston.

Epstein, of course, is a smart guy, too. He knows what Papelbon can do. He knows what Bard can do. He knows Papelbon will hit free agency after the 2011 season. He knows Bard will start becoming eligible for salary arbitration after the 2011 season -- and while middle relievers don't make much in arbitration, Bard's salary would spike after a year or two as the closer.

Bard, in other words, might wind up just as expensive as Papelbon -- and he might be at least as willing to go elsewhere as Papelbon.

Papelbon has been one of the best relief pitchers in baseball over the past four seasons. Bard looked great in his first stint in the major leagues. Both know they're talented and that they can make a lot of money playing baseball. Assuming Papelbon is the one who's going to wind up in another uniform might be a little bit premature.

Dustin Pedroia loves the breaking ball

Subtitle: A voyage through FanGraphs' Pitch Value statistics.

Every hitter has his pitches he loves. Every hitter has his pitches he loves a little less. Thanks to FanGraphs' Pitch Value numbers, we can find out a little bit about what pitches each Red Sox hitter loves or loves less.

The measure here is "Runs created per 100 pitches seen." The calculations are complicated but the idea is relatively simple: A single contributes a certain fraction of a run. A double contributes a certain fraction of a run. A strikeout costs a certain fraction of a run.

Against the fastball
1. Kevin Youkilis, 2.56 runs
2. Victor Martinez, 2.42
3. Jason Bay, 1.8
4. J.D. Drew, 1.73
5. Julio Lugo, 1.03

Against the changeup
1. David Ortiz, 1.92 runs
2. Julio Lugo, 1.39
3. Jason Bay, 1.13
4. Kevin Youkilis, 1.94
5. Jason Varitek, 0.29

(You're probably wondering why Julio Lugo looked so bad if he was so good against fastballs and changeups -- or maybe you've already guessed that he was a minus-2.56 against curveballs.)

Against the curveball
1. Dustin Pedroia, 2.56 runs
2. Alex Gonzalez, 2.44
3. Kevin Youkilis, 1.94
4. David Ortiz, 1.35
5. Jason Bay, 0.76

Against the slider
1. Jason Varitek, 2.67 runs
2. Jacoby Ellsbury, 1.56
3. Jason Bay, 1.14
4. Dustin Pedroia, 0.92
5. J.D. Drew, minus-0.03

Pedroia actually ranked ninth in the major leagues last season against breaking balls, compiling a combined 3.48 runs against curveballs and sliders. He might claim he loves the high, inside fastball, but he was most productive last season against breaking balls.

Two seasons ago, Pedroia ranked 11th against breaking balls, compiling 3.67 runs against curveballs and sliders.

According to the new Red Sox Annual, Pedroia swung and missed at just six percent of curves and sliders against righthanded pitchers -- best in the major leagues. He hit .350 against curveballs last season, including .375 against curveballs from righties.

Kevin Youkilis, on the other hand, loves pitches that come in straight and don't break. He ranked 16th in the major leagues last season with a combined 3.5 runs created against fastballs and changeups. Two seasons ago, Youkilis ranked eighth in the major leagues with a combined 4.48 against fastballs and changeups, nestled right between Albert Pujols and Chipper Jones.

His Achilles' heel over the last two seasons has been the slider. He compiled minus-1.42 runs against the slider last season.

All of this is subject to context: Bay is, by reputation, a fastball hitter who has little success against good breaking pitches. Bad breaking pitches still count on the scale -- and Bay pounds bad breaking pitches.

(Want more context? The best fastball among Red Sox pitchers last season, per 100 pitches, belonged to Tim Wakefield. It only was so effective, though, because he threw it as a complement to his mystifying knuckleball.)

Weaknesses still are weaknesses, and strengths still are strengths. If a pitcher is going to try to get Pedroia out with a breaking ball in a big spot next season, it had better be an awfully good one.

Josh Beckett's fluky home-run rate

It's easy to forget now that Josh Beckett looked like a Cy Young candidate as late as mid-August last season. The hard-throwing righty had a 3.10 ERA and a strikeout-to-walk ratio of 3.45. His win-loss record was 14-4, for those who care about that sort of thing. He'd thrown three complete games, including a three-hit shutout against Kansas City and a three-hit shutout against Atlanta.

Heck, he'd even hit a home run.

But the longball started to cause problems for him in late August, and his ERA reacted accordingly. By Sept. 2, Beckett had allowed at least two home runs in five straight starts and had seen his ERA jump to 3.87 -- and Jon Lester was the Game 1 started in the ALCS.

Home runs are one of those complicated things pitchers both can and can't control. A pitcher has a degree of control over how hard the ball gets hit, and how hard the ball gets hit has a lot to do with whether it goes over the fence. There's a little bit of luck involved, though, in whether fly balls turn into home runs or whether they end up caught at the warning track.

A look at Beckett's entire season indicates that he probably got a little bit unlucky during his rough patch in August.

(Thanks to FanGraphs' tremendous new splits tool for the data.)

Beckett saw his ground-ball rate stay pretty consistent last season, spiking at 52.2 percent in June but never falling below 46 percent down the stretch. His fly-ball rate wasn't quite so consistent, jumping from 28.3 percent in June to 38.9 percent in August. At the same time, though, his line-drive rate hit a season low in August -- and line-drive rate usually is a better indicator of pitcher success or failure than either of the other two measures.

Even as his fly-ball rate jumped, his home-run rate jumped even higher -- higher than it had in his entire Red Sox career. Check out his HR/FB rates by month last season:

Home runs out of total fly balls
April: 10.0 percent
May: 13.0
June: 3.8
July: 8.1
August: 27.3
September: 8.6

(Cue the outlier music.)

Not once in his Red Sox career has Beckett had a month even close to that bad. Not once in his Red Sox career has Beckett's HR/FB ratio even touched 20. His previous worst came in 2006 when his HR/FB numbers fluctuated between 11.1 and 19.5 percent. More often than not, his HR/FB ratio has been under 10 percent.

In other words, something looks awfully fluky about the rough August that Beckett endured last season -- and that's an encouraging sign for this season.

Cameron could benefit from Drew and Ortiz

Some still insist that J.D. Drew and David Ortiz will hit back-to-back in the Red Sox lineup, probably right behind Kevin Youkilis.

From one perspective, it makes sense for them to do so. After Youkilis and Victor Martinez, Drew and Ortiz ought to be the two best hitters in the Red Sox lineup. Adrian Beltre and Mike Cameron were signed more for their defense than their bats, and it makes sense that they'd hit in the bottom third of the lineup.

But if Terry Francona does what he normally tries so hard to do -- that is, split up his lefties so as to make opposing managers' jobs more difficult -- he's going to hit one of the two between Drew and Ortiz in a lineup that looks something like this:

Ellsbury, LF
Pedroia, 2B
Martinez, C
Youkilis, 1B
Ortiz, DH
Cameron, CF
Drew, RF
Beltre, 3B
Scutaro, SS

A lineup like that could really benefit Cameron in the late innings.

Look at it this way: The point of inserting a buffer between Ortiz and Drew is to prevent an opposing manager from bringing in a lefty specialist to set down both in order before giving the ball back to a righty. Francona knows that. He only hit Drew and Ortiz back-to-back seven times last season. When Ortiz hit third, Drew hit fifth. When Ortiz hit fifth, Drew hit seventh. When Ortiz hit sixth, Drew hit eighth. Either Jason Bay or Mike Lowell almost always was slotted between Drew and Ortiz in the Red Sox lineup.

When the lineup rolls around to its Ortiz-Cameron-Drew-Beltre segment, an opposing manager will have two choices:
1. Employ a lefty-righty-lefty-righty strategy, thus burning a righthanded relief pitcher just to face Cameron;
2. Use the same lefty to face both Ortiz and Drew, allowing him in the process to face Cameron and maybe even Beltre.

Therein lies the beauty. Ortiz might be neutralized by tough lefties. Drew might even be neutralized by tough lefties -- though not as much as you'd think.

Cameron, though, thrives against lefties.

Consider the center fielder's splits:

2009
vs. RHP: .244/.318/.430 (.748 OPS)
vs. LHP: .271/.420/.534 (.954 OPS)

2008
vs. RHP: .231/.309/.452 (.761 OPS)
vs. LHP: .282/.397/.555 (.951 OPS)

Career
vs. RHP: .245/.330/.435 (.765 OPS)
vs. LHP: .267/.370/.489 (.859 OPS)

Over the last two seasons, Cameron has seen his OPS jump about 200 points when he's facing lefthanded pitching. Over his entire career, he's still seen his OPS jump about 100 points when he's facing lefthanded pitching.

(Beltre has a career split that's not nearly as pronounced, but he too has OPS'ed 200 points higher against lefties than against righties in each of his last two seasons.)

Francona says over and over that he wants to do all he can to make the opposing manager's job difficult. By slotting Cameron between Drew and Ortiz, he's does one of two things:
* He makes the opposing manager burn through extra bullpen arms in the late innings; or
* He makes the opposing manager use a lefty to face a righty who treats lefties like punching bags.

Spring training stats all over the map

Pitchers and catchers report on Thursday. Boston College and Northeastern visit City of Palms Park on March 3. Exhibition games begin in earnest on March 4 against Minnesota in the first bout of the annual Mayor's Cup.

Spring training statistics usually don't mean anything. A 4-for-4 performance for a no-name minor leaguer on a Tuesday afternoon in Clearwater or Port Charlotte usually doesn't mean much. Occasionally, very occasionally, a few big days in a row can be a sign of things to come -- and that's enough to make fans pore through the spring training statistics in hopes of picking up the next player on the rise before he starts rising.

Such was the case last year. At one end of the spectrum:
Jeff Bailey (45 at-bats): .356/.455/.600
Chris Carter (76 at-bats): .355/.380/.658
Nick Green (63 at-bats): .349/.414/.524

None of the three did much at the plate with the Red Sox, though Green started off hot in April and May before his impatience at the plate caught up with him.

At the other end of the spectrum:
Jason Bay (44 at-bats): .227/.364/.545
David Ortiz (40 at-bats): .250/.392/.500
Jason Varitek (51 at-bats): .216/.241/.549
Kevin Youkilis (30 at-bats): .233/.343/.333

Ortiz actually hit worse in April and May than he had in spring training. Varitek actually OBP'ed .348 in April and had hit 10 home runs by May 31 before his numbers went into a tailspin.

Youkilis, for his part, didn't see his batting average drop below .400 until April 30 and didn't see his on-base percentage drop below .500 until after a stint on the disabled list in mid-May.

And then there's:
Lars Anderson (24 at-bats): .208/.321/.208

In far too small of a sample size to make any pronouncements, Anderson nonetheless gave the first indication that he was not about to explode onto the scene as the next elite prospect. He'll be a player whose spring training numbers this season once again will be overanalyzed despite a sample size too small for any actual analysis.

Pitchers' numbers often can be more telling, especially the strikeout and walk numbers that don't depend so much on luck. Among Red Sox pitchers last spring:

Jon Lester (19 2/3 IP): 1.83 ERA, 20 K, 11 BB
Clay Buchholz (25 IP): 2.52 ERA, 19 K, 4 BB
Josh Beckett (27 2/3 IP): 3.25 ERA, 17 K, 5 BB

Buchholz stands out, just as he stood out last spring. His ERA actually was 0.46 at one point before a scuffle at the end of the spring. He then dominated the Triple-A International League until the Red Sox called him up.

On the other hand:

Tim Wakefield (15 IP): 5.40 ERA, 11 K, 8 BB
Manny Delcarmen (13 2/3 IP): 4.61 ERA, 9 K, 6 BB
Ramon Ramirez (12 1/3 IP): 4.38 ERA, 12 K, 3 BB

One could make an argument that the above three pitchers were among the most valuable on the Red Sox staff in April and May. Delcarmen didn't allow his first earned run until May 3. Ramirez didn't allow his first earned run until May 4. Wakefield almost threw a no-hitter in Oakland on April 15 and ended up earning a spot on the American League All-Star team.

All three tailed off later in the season. Their subpar numbers in spring training, though, didn't come close to forecasting pitchers who would throw darts at the start of the season.

The lesson here? There are times when excellent spring training numbers can tell a story, just as they did for Buchholz a season ago. There are times when lousy spring training numbers can be a bad omen, as they were for Anderson a year ago.

Mostly, spring training numbers don't tell much of a story at all. Established players are trying to get into a rhythm. Young players often are trying too hard to impress. Injured players aren't trying to do anything except healthy.

Still, though, it's fun to look at.

Hitting J.D. Drew against lefties

When J.D. Drew sat out against tough lefties last season, Red Sox manager Terry Francona normally pointed out that he had to get at-bats for Rocco Baldelli and thus was doing so more for the benefit of Baldelli than for Drew.

We'll find out this season if he was telling the truth.

Baldelli is gone. Jeremy Hermida is the new fourth outfielder -- and Hermida is just as lefthanded as Drew is.

Francona still will have to find at-bats for Hermida. The former first-round draft pick still has enormous potential, and the Red Sox wouldn't have traded for him if they didn't think he had something to offer.

Those at-bats, though, will have to come mostly against righthanded pitchers. Hermida spelling Drew against lefties makes pretty much no sense if you look at their career splits:

Against lefties
Drew: .262/.366/.438 (.804)
Hermida: .237/.321/.376 (.697)

Against righties
Drew: .292/.407/.528 (.935)
Hermida: .274/.351/.441 (.792)

Drew, then, is going to have to hit against lefties more often than he has in his first three seasons with the Red Sox.

How will he do? Here's a look at his recent history against lefties:

2004 (167 at-bats): .287/.408/.521 (.929)
2005 (68 at-bats): .235/.416/.279 (.695)
2006 (119 at-bats): .244/.338/.378 (.716)
2007 (116 at-bats): .224/.285/.353 (.638)
2008 (94 at-bats): .284/.426/.500 (.926)
2009 (114 at-bats): .272/.381/.482 (.863)

It's hard to find any sort of consistent pattern. In some ways, the more at-bats he's had against lefties, the better -- except for 2007, a year that was miserable for him all the way around until his grand slam against Cleveland.

He has, for what it's worth, OPS'ed better than .850 against lefties in each of the last two seasons.

The above numbers do have to be taken with a grain of salt. Francona has often picked his spots to use Drew against lefties. He might not have that luxury this season.

For what it's worth, Drew is 2-for-10 (.200) with five strikeouts against CC Sabathia but 13-for-36 (.361) with 13 strikeouts against Andy Pettitte, having drawn one total walk against the Yankees' two best lefthanded pitchers.

How long would you stick with Ortiz?

With spring training right around the corner -- and kudos to the Herald's Michael Silverman for the first on-the-scene story of the spring -- it's worth taking a look at what might be the question that determines the fate of the Red Sox season: Should David Ortiz endure another epic slump in April and May, how long should the Red Sox wait before pulling the plug?

The murmurs won't take long to grow in volume. You'd better believe there will be those ready to storm the streets should CC Sabathia strike him out in the first inning on Opening Day.

Ortiz, for those with short memories, didn't hit his first home run last season until May 20 and took a .188 batting average and .281 on-base percentage into play on June 6, the day on which he hit his first home run and seemed to get his feet under him for the first time. From then on, though, he hit .266 with a .360 on-base percentage and a .557 slugging percentage -- more than respectable, even for Big Papi.

Ortiz might just endure the same type of miserable slump this season as he did last season. Theo Epstein and Terry Francona then would have to make a difficult decision, especially with the potential-laden Jeremy Hermida waiting on the bench: Stick with Big Papi or cut him loose?

Odds are they'll stick with him -- and here are four reasons why:

Kent Hrbek, 1993
A beefy slugger in the Ortiz mold, Hrbek saw his numbers take their first severe downturn in 1992, his OPS falling from .834 to .765 and his home runs falling below 20 for the first time in almost 10 years. The year after that, Hrbek hit .238/.343/.446 in the first half, going into the All-Star break with a sub-.800 OPS for the first time since 1985.

In the second half, Hrbek posted a line of .246/.370/.487 -- including .295/.434/.689 in September.

Mo Vaughn, 2002
Vaughn missed the 2001 season after undergoing surgery to repair a ruptured tendon in his arm, and he got off to a lousy start after being traded to the Mets, hitting .200 with a .304 on-base percentage in the month of May. He hit for next to no power had a line of .248/.340/.399 at the All-Star break, a .739 OPS.

In the second half, Vaughn posted a line of .271/.360/.520 -- including .314/.442/.614 in September.

Carlos Delgado, 2008
Delgado hit just 24 home runs in 2007, his first season with fewer than 30 home runs and a sub-.500 slugging percentage in more than a decade. He then hit .198/.297/.323 in April and .229/.308/.476 in June, going into the All-Star break with a line of .248/.328/.455.

In the second half, Delgado posted a line of .303/.386/.606 -- including .340/.400/.649 in September.

David Ortiz, 2009
Oh, yeah, that. Some might dismiss the strong second half Ortiz enjoyed as a miracle not likely to happen again, but it's all part of the data set. The slugger went into the All-Star break wtih a line of .222/.317/.416 and had almost twice as many strikeouts (78) as walks (40).

In the second half, of course, Ortiz posted a line of .258/.350/.516, boosting his slugging percentage by 100 points. After hitting just one home run in April and May combined, he hit seven home runs apiece in June, July and August and six home runs in September.

What does it all mean? There's no good time to pull the plug on Ortiz unless he's completely and utterly overmatched at the plate. A year ago, he was OBP'ing .290 on April 30 and .284 on May 31 but still had a walk rate of better than 10 percent and still was seeing as many pitches as any player in the patient Red Sox lineup.

He's still a hitter that changes the way pitchers pitch. He's still a hitter who works counts and draws walks and keeps the line moving. He's still a hitter who forces opposing managers to use their lefty specialists.

There's almost no chance the Red Sox pick up their $12.5 million option they hold on Ortiz for 2011.

That, though, doesn't mean the Red Sox are going to give up on Ortiz midseason if he slumps again. There's too much history of sluggers breaking out of slumps in the second half for them just to cut bait and let him walk.

Wins and losses and relief pitchers

We've made quite a bit of progress lately toward discounting the value of the "win" as a measuring stick for starting pitchers. Tim Lincecum won the Cy Young Award in the National League last season with just 15 wins, the lowest win total ever by a Cy Young winner in a non-strike season.

Some still make the argument that the job of a starting pitcher is to win games. A pitcher is told to take the ball and bring home a 'W,' and if he hasn't done so, he hasn't done his job. If he loses a 2-1 game, after all, the opposing pitcher did his job better than he did, sort of, except if the two runs he allowed came on errors or on inherited runs scored after he'd left the game.

(No one ever points out that the job of a catcher or a first baseman is to go out and win games, too. No one ever points out that Joe Mauer had a worse win-loss record -- 74-64 -- than Jason Varitek -- 62-47 -- or uses that information to draw any conclusions. That would be absurd, right? But that's another argument for another day.)

Relief pitchers, though, present an entirely separate problem. Relievers earn wins if their team happens to take the lead for good while they're pitching. If they give up the lead in the top half of the inning before their team takes it back in the bottom half? That's ineffective pitching, but that's also deserving of a credited "win."

Maybe this just is a pet peeve. Maybe, though, it's time to stop referencing win-loss records for relievers in the context of anything except meaningless trivia.

You see it everywhere. Here, in a story about Ramon Ramirez filing for arbitration. Here, in a story about Hideki Okajima agreeing to a one-year contract. Here, in a story about Jonathan Papelbon -- a closer, for goodness sake. The first statistic mentioned about each of the above pitchers in each of the above stories is his win-loss record -- something that's about as relevant in evaluating his performance as the name of his fourth-grade teacher.

The winningest Red Sox reliever last season was Ramirez, who finished with the exact same number of wins (seven) as Clay Buchholz and Brad Penny. Okajima wasn't far behind (six), and neither was Manny Delcarmen (five).

What does that tell you? Let's look at a handful of the wins earned by Ramirez last season:

1. On April 17 against Baltimore, Ramirez got Javier Lopez out of a jam in the sixth inning and set down the side in the seventh before running into trouble with a 10-8 lead in the top of the eighth. Cesar Izturis lined to left, but Brian Roberts and Adam Jones followed with back-to-back singles -- putting the tying run on base. Hideki Okajima then relieved Ramirez and retired Nick Markakis and Aubrey Huff to prevent the tying run from scoring.

2. On April 24 against New York, Ramirez pitched a scoreless inning -- just like Delcarmen, Lopez, Papelbon and Takashi Saito had before him. Ramirez even allowed two runners to reach before getting Melky Cabrera to ground into a double play. The difference? His happened to be the scoreless inning before Kevin Youkilis hit a walk-off home run.

3. On May 10 against Tampa Bay, Ramirez threw all of seven pitches, relieving Okajima in the eighth inning with the score tied and the bases empty and getting Ben Zobrist to ground to first. The Red Sox scored the go-ahead run in the bottom of the eighth, and Papelbon finished it out.

And so on.

Let's look at the leaderboard for wins among relievers in the American League last season:
1. Alfredo Aceves, 10 wins (3.54 ERA)
2. Craig Breslow, 8 wins (3.36 ERA)
3. Miguel Batista, 7 wins (4.04 ERA)
4. J.P. Howell, 7 wins (2.83 ERA)
5. Jason Frasor, 7 wins (2.50 ERA)
6. Jesse Crain, 7 wins (4.70 ERA)
7. Zach Miner, 7 wins (4.29 ERA)
8. Ramirez, 7 wins (2.84 ERA)

New York's Jonathan Albaladejo had five wins and a 5.24 ERA. Minnesota's Jon Rauch had five wins and a 1.72 ERA. There's even less correlation between wins and effective performance for relievers than for starters.

(ERA doesn't even tell the story as accurately as WHIP or opponents' OPS given how much inherited runners can skew the numbers. Again, though, that's an argument for another day.)

Maybe this is too harsh. Maybe it doesn't hurt anything to point out that a relief pitcher went 7-4 as long as his 2.84 ERA and 1.335 WHIP are included in the conversation.

On the other hand, saying, "He went 7-4 and had a 2.84 ERA" is just as relevant as saying, "He likes pepperoni pizza and had a 2.84 ERA." Actually, it's even less relevant: Whereas his 7-4 record has little to do with anything but outside factors, his affection for pepperoni pizza might actually affect his future performance.

(This writer, a fan of pepperoni pizza who currently is procrastinating on a trip to the gym, would know all about that.)

Though some are kicking and screaming along the way, many baseball fans and baseball writers now understand the way statistics like ERA and WHIP represent a far better measure of reliever performance than wins. The next step? Eliminating mention of reliever wins entirely.

Ellsbury could be Theo's first arbitration case

Theo Epstein has never had to prepare an arbitration case. A one-year contract just shy of $10 million for Jonathan Papelbon this winter ensured Epstein's record would remain unblemished.

The next challenge for Epstein, though, is looming over the horizon. The next challenge is Jacoby Ellsbury.

Arbitration and the negotiations that usually precede it only get complicated when two sides disagree wildly on the relative value of a player.

Ellsbury is precisely the type of player with whom a panel of arbitrators might have a field day. Ellsbury is an athletic and speedy outfielder with advanced fielding metrics that make him out to be a lousy defensive outfielder. Ellsbury is the best base-stealer in the major leagues but posted an on-base percentage of just .355, fifth-best on his own team. Ellsbury has speed and gap power but hit just 37 combined doubles and triples last season, fewer than Dustin Pedroia and only one more than David Ortiz.

The thing Ellsbury does best -- stealing bases -- isn't something the Red Sox traditionally value. The thing with which Ellsbury has had the most trouble -- drawing walks and getting on base -- is something the Red Sox do value.

It'll be fascinating to see how a panel of arbitrators values the contributions of Ellsbury should the case get that far next winter. Epstein had a history of avoiding arbitration, but it might be difficult for him to find a middle ground with Ellsbury and agent Scott Boras should the two groups differ widely in their evaluation of his abilities.

While assorted clubhouse attendants and contracted movers pack up the truck on Friday for its trip to Fort Myers, Epstein likely will have an eye on the arbitration case of Tampa Bay Rays center fielder B.J. Upton. The two sides in that case were a mere $300,000 apart but couldn't come to an agreement before the deadline to trade figures came and went. The hearing is scheduled for Friday, and a verdict likely will come before Monday.

(Note: The Rays won the arbitration case.)

A win for Upton might not just mean an extra $300,000 in his pocket. A win for Upton might embolden similar players in the future -- Ellsbury being the first -- to go to a hearing and see if they can convince a panel that their athleticism is worth big money.

So far, it seems, players in the Ellsbury mold have been willing to sign long-term extensions to avoid their arbitration years in exchange for financial security. Carl Crawford signed a long-term deal with the Rays. Chone Figgins signed a deal with the Los Angeles Angels. Curtis Granderson signed a deal with the Detroit Tigers. Jose Reyes signed a deal with the New York Mets. Chris Young signed a deal with the Arizona Diamondbacks.

All of those deals represented financial concessions in exchange for long-term security, just as the contracts of Jon Lester and Dustin Pedroia with the Red Sox did.

There's a pretty good chance, though, that Boras will rebuff any efforts by the Red Sox at a long-term extension for less money and instead take his chances with a year-by-year approach the way Papelbon has. There's little precedent in arbitration for a player whose best asset is his ability to steal bases -- and Boras undoubtedly will dismiss comparisons to Crawford or Granderson as irrelevant given their context within long-term deals.

Just for the sake of argument, though, here's a look at the deals to which the above players agreed in lieu of going through salary arbitration:

Carl Crawford ($15.25 million over four years)
Arb Year 1: $2.5 million
Arb Year 2: $4 million
Arb Year 3: $5.25 million

Chone Figgins ($10.5 million over three years)
Super-Two: $2.25 million*
Arb Year 1: $3.5 million
Arb Year 2: $4.75 million
Arb Year 3: $5.775 million**
* Figgins had enough service time as a Super Two to qualify for four arbitration seasons rather than three
** Figgins signed a one-year deal to avoid a hearing

Curtis Granderson ($30.25 million over five years)
Arb Year 1: $3.5 million
Arb Year 2: $5.5 million
Arb Year 3: $8.25 million

Jose Reyes ($23.25 million over four years)
Arb Year 1: $2.5 million
Arb Year 2: $4 million
Arb Year 3: $5.75 million

Chris Young ($28 million over five years)
Arb Year 1: $3.25 million
Arb Year 2: $5 million
Arb Year 3: $7 million

(One side note: It's fascinating that Jonathan Papelbon earned $6.25 million in his first arbitration while each of the above players earned $3.5 million or less. Saves might be overvalued in the arbitration process, but stolen bases appear not to be.)

If Figgins, Granderson and Young all earned better than $3 million in their fourth major-league season -- a player doesn't qualify for arbitration unless he has at least three seasons of service time, with the exception of Super Twos -- you can bet Boras and Ellsbury will ask for at least $3 million in arbitration.

If Upton wins his case on Friday, you can bet Boras and Ellsbury will ask for close to $4 million in arbitration. Just look at the numbers for the two players last season:

Ellsbury: .301/.355/.415 with 70 stolen bases
Upton: .241/.313/.373 with 42 stolen bases

On top of that, Upton struck out 152 times while Ellsbury struck out 74 times. It's not difficult to make a case that Ellsbury should be paid more than Upton -- especially to an arbitrator who might or might not be well-versed in sabermetrics or advanced defensive statistics.

Should the panel of arbitrators rule in favor of Upton this weekend, Epstein might have to start bracing for the toughest arbitration fight of his career.

Postscript: They didn't. But an initial arbitration figure of $3.5 million is going to be far from out of line for Ellsbury.

Waiting for Zach Daeges

News item: "The Red Sox today announced that 20 players will attend the team’s Major League Spring Training camp as non-roster invitees."

Lars Anderson was invited to major-league camp with the Red Sox for the second straight year, his name among those released today by the team. The much-hyped Anderson shared a neighborhood in the far corner of the clubhouse last spring with two other prospects invited to their first major-league camp.

One was Josh Reddick, who jumped ahead of Anderson and didn't have to be invited to major-league camp because he's already part of the team's 40-man roster.

The other was a player who, like Anderson, again will participate in major-league camp despite not being part of the 40-man roster. The other was Zach Daeges.

The 26-year-old Daeges seems to have disappeared from the radar of the Red Sox. He's never been added to the 40-man roster. He was eligible for the Rule 5 draft back in December, in fact, but no team took a flier on him. Should the Red Sox not add him to the 40-man roster this season, he'll be eligible once again next December. SoxProspects.com classifies him as a Post-Prospect, a player who might have something to contribute but who probably isn't going to develop much farther.

He's become the forgotten man in the Red Sox farm system.

A look at the numbers, though, reveals that Daeges really can hit. Consider his progression through the minor leagues since he came out of Creighton University:

Age 22 (Single-A): .288/.402/.409 in 198 at-bats

Age 23 (Single-A): .330/.423/.579 in 515 at-bats

Age 24 (Double-A): .307/.412/.454 in 394 at-bats

So far, so good, right?

Age 25 (Triple-A): Injured

Daeges missed most of last season with an ankle injury suffered in spring training a year ago. He played in just nine games and was credited with just 29 at-bats for Triple-A Pawtucket before he shut it down. He thought most of the season that he'd sprained his ankle, but he told the Providence Journal back in October that he had an extra bone behind his ankle that had been knocked out of place. He had surgery in September to remove that bone.

In some respects, his window might already have closed. He's 26 years old -- two months older than Jon Lester, for the sake of context -- and doesn't yet have 30 at-bats at Triple-A. He can't play above-average defense at any position. He might not have much development left in him.

He has yet, however, to get on base at a clip less than .400 in the minor leagues. He might be 26 years old, but he's only entering his third full season in the minor leagues. A big season at Pawtucket might propel him back onto the radar.

Besides, if any organization understand the value of waiting for an on-base machine who takes a while to develop and break into the major leagues, it ought to be the Red Sox. Check out this career progression:

Age 24 (Double-A): .330/.487/.465 in 312 at-bats
Age 24 (Triple-A): .170/.295/.248 in 109 at-bats

Age 25 (Triple-A): .266/.350/.403 in 154 at-bats
Age 25 (Boston): .260/.367/.413 in 208 at-bats

Age 26 (Triple-A): .322/.459/.592 in 152 at-bats
Age 26 (Boston): .278/.400/405 in 79 at-bats

Age 27 (Boston): .279/.381/.429 in 569 at-bats

You know that career progression. That's Kevin Youkilis.

When Youkilis was 24 years old, he played the bulk of his games at Double-A -- just like Daeges. When Youkilis was 25 years old, he played the bulk of his games at Triple-A -- just like Daeges would have had he not gotten hurt. Youkilis then bounced back and forth between Triple-A and the major leagues for two seasons until he got his full-time break. Two seasons after that, at the age of 29, Youkilis blossomed into a star.

Developing so late is far from common. Most teams focus more on their 21-year-old prospects than their 26-year-old prospects, and with good reason. Youkilis' feat truly was remarkable.

But before Daeges missed an entire season due to injury, he'd shown himself to be an on-base machine in the minor leagues. If he can hit in Triple-A the way he's hit at every other stop along the way, he might yet follow the path Youkilis blazed for him.

It's not likely, but it's possible.

Verlander deal makes Lester a steal

Take a look at the American League leaders in ERA+ last season:

1. Zack Greinke, 205
2. Felix Hernandez, 174
3. Roy Halladay, 155
4. Jon Lester, 138
5. Justin Verlander, 133

With the news that the Detroit Tigers have locked up Verlander, three of those five pitchers now have signed contract extensions this winter -- and the other two signed extensions last winter. It's only natural to compare them. It's worth looking again at those five pitchers -- only this time in the context of their contracts:

1. Greinke, $38 million over four years ($9.5 million/year)
2. Hernandez, $78 million over five years ($15.6 million/year)
3. Halladay, $60 million over three years ($20 million/year)
4. Lester, $30 million over five years ($6 million/year)
5. Verlander, $80 million over five years ($16 million/year)

Any one of those stand out to you?

Lester last season ranked second in the American League in strikeout rate, fifth in ERA and sixth in strikeout-to-walk ratio. Among lefties in the American League, he's as good as it gets -- and that includes Cliff Lee, traded from Philadelphia to Seattle as part of the Halladay blockbuster.

The structure of the system, of course, had quite a bit to do with each of the above contracts. Halladay was set to hit free agency after the 2010 season, so his contract had to come close to his value on the open market.

Hernandez was arbitration-eligible last season for the first time and would have had two years left under team control before he got to the free-agent market. Same goes for Verlander. Greinke likewise had just two seasons of salary arbitration left when he signed his contract a year ago.

Lester wouldn't have been arbitration-eligible until this season, meaning his five-year contract really only bought out one or two years of free agency. His annual salaries ($3.75 million in 2010 and $5.75 million in 2011) don't exactly line up with what he'd earn in arbitration, but they're not too far off.

Still, though, in terms of raw production, the Red Sox might as well be stealing from Lester. If the lefty pitches anything like he has since he was pronounced cancer-free, he'll be a perennial Cy Young Award contender -- but he won't even earn $7 million in a season until 2012.

Maybe the Red Sox should buy him a pickup truck.

The value of Victor Martinez

With rumors on a contract extension for Joe Mauer flying around, it appears more and more likely that the Twins will sign their franchise catcher to a contract extension before he hits the free-agent market.

That would leave Victor Martinez as the best catcher available in an otherwise weak class of catchers whose contracts will expire after the 2010 season. For teams losing catchers in the near future -- and the Yankees and Red Sox both are in that category -- the switch-hitting Martinez could be a prize worth fighting over.

His last four seasons:
2006: .316/.391/.465 (.856)
2007: .301/.374/.505 (.879)
2008: .278/.337/.365 (.701)
2009: .303/.381/.480 (.861)

If you drop the one outlier, Martinez has demonstrated that he's a perennial threat to get on base at a clip of .375 or better and to slug .475 or better. He's a terrific hitter. The number of teams inquiring about his services will reflect that.

His value, though, will depend on the position he's playing. His value will drop precipitously if he's more of a first baseman than a catcher going forward.

Consider again the last four seasons:

2006: 127 starts at C/19 starts at 1B
2007: 118 starts at C/24 starts at 1B
2008: 54 starts at C/9 starts at 1B
2009: 82 starts at C/66 starts at 1B

A year after an elbow injury cost him most of June, July and August, Martinez saw a dramatic upturn in his time at first base. He made almost as many starts at first base in his two months in Boston (22) as he had any any full season to that point.

His 30th birthday is in his rear-view mirror. His days of catching 100-plus games probably are over.

Theo Epstein made clear at the start of the offseason that Martinez will assume the bulk of the catching duties next season. The older Martinez gets, though, the more time he'll spend at first base to diminish the injury risk while keeping his bat in the lineup. For the Red Sox, the development of Luis Exposito, Tim Federowicz and Mark Wagner makes Martinez even less likely to catch every day in 2011 and 2012.

Once the contract of David Ortiz expires, Martinez even could play 40 or 50 games as the designated hitter to minimize wear and tear on his body.

The less he plays catcher, though, the less valuable he becomes. His OPS last season (.856) ranked him second in the major leagues among catchers. Among all players, though, he ranked 47th -- behind, among others, Nick Swisher, Russell Branyan and Michael Cuddyer.

He's an elite hitter as a catcher. He's actually a pretty average hitter as a first baseman. Finding a good-hitting catcher is simply more difficult than finding a good-hitting first baseman -- and the Wins Above Replacement statistic makes that clear in each of Martinez's big seasons at the plate:

2006
Martinez, C (.856 OPS): 4.9 WAR
Justin Morneau, 1B (.934 OPS): 4.4 WAR
Carlos Delgado, 1B (.909 OPS): 2.9 WAR
Todd Helton, 1B (.880 OPS): 2.4 WAR

2007
Martinez, C (.879 OPS): 5.2 WAR
Prince Fielder, 1B (1.013 OPS): 5.1 WAR
Ryan Howard, 1B (.976 OPS): 4.3 WAR
Mark Teixeira, 1B (.963 OPS): 3.9 WAR

(2008 was something of a wasted season for Martinez. so we'll ignore that here.)

2009
Martinez, C/1B (.861 OPS): 4.9 WAR
Ryan Howard, 1B (.931 OPS): 4.8 WAR
Kendry Morales, 1B (.924 OPS): 4.2 WAR
Justin Morneau, 1B (.878 OPS): 3.2 WAR

What does that tell you? Moving from catcher to first base, in terms of value, is about the same as a 100-point drop in OPS. A contract for a catcher with an OPS of .850 should look a lot different than a contract for a first baseman with an OPS of .850.

If Martinez is willing to play for $10 or $12 million a season, the Red Sox should lock him up for the next three or four years. If another team offers Martinez anything close to Mauer money -- or even anything close to Matt Holliday money -- the Red Sox probably will be better off letting him walk.

Bullpen competition just gets deeper

It doesn't sound like Joe Nelson was in a position to be particularly choosy, but his phone interview with MLB.com certainly revealed an interesting sentiment.

"For me," he said, "(Boston) just looked like the best place to have a legitimate fighting chance in spring training. ... They're not bringing in a whole bunch of guys. They have the two spots they're really looking at. They have internal depth but not as much experience, and, for me, I had multiple teams making multiple offers, and they just seemed like the best fit."

The goal for Nelson appears to be to win the last spot in the bullpen, the spot vacated by Takashi Saito this winter. Saito tended not to pitch in many high-profile situations, making just seven appearances in what could be defined as save situations and facing almost two-thirds of hitters in situations that could be defined as low-leverage.

Any major-league job, though, is a coveted major-league job. The Red Sox appear to have candidates lined up for either one or two bullpen spots, depending upon what happens with Tim Wakefield. Scott Atchison, Boof Bonser, Ramon A. Ramirez, Dustin Richardson and Brian Shouse all figure to be in the mix with Nelson for the final one or two spots in the bullpen.

If Wakefield finds his way onto the Opening Day roster, only one of the above pitchers will join him. The winner probably will be the one who carves the best niche for himself.

Nelson? The journeyman righty, who made three appearances for the Red Sox in 2004, compiled a 2.00 ERA in 54 innings pitched for the Florida Marlins in 2008. His ERA jumped to 4.02 with Tampa Bay last season as his walk rate jumped (from 3.7 to 6.0 per nine innings) and his strikeout rate dropped (from 10.8 to 8.0 per nine innings).

Interestingly, Nelson has a reverse split: He actually tends to fare better against lefthanded hitters than he does against righties. Lefties have OPS'ed .668 against him in his career as compared to .776 for righties, and his strikeout-to-walk ratio last season was almost twice as good against lefties (1.77) as it was against righties (0.93).

In that way, he's a little bit like Manny Delcarmen. Having too much in common with a reliever already on the staff probably isn't good for his chances, as the Red Sox already have a couple of pitchers on staff who historically have had success against lefties. That niche already has been taken.

Several other candidates for the last spot have their own niches:
* Bonser used to be a starter and could fill the Justin Masterson swingman role, throwing hard out of the bullpen but making a spot start or two;
* Ramirez is almost untouchable (.388 career OPS) against righties, though the small sample size and a relatively low strikeout-to-walk ratio (2.5) means that number might be unsustainable;
* Richardson is a young lefty who misses bats at a Daniel Bard-esque rate and could grow into a complement for Bard before too long;
* Shouse is a one-hitter lefty in the mold of Mike Myers.

Nelson doesn't really have the type of distinguishing characteristic -- other than his "Vulcan" changeup -- that makes him a strong candidate to win that last spot.

He's right, though: It's all still up in the air. He'll have a legitimate fighting chance -- and with the way relievers come and go, even starting the season in Pawtucket would give him a chance to get to the major leagues before too long.

Disconnect between Red Sox, fans all winter

Dustin Pedroia has talked with WEEI hosts every week all winter. Kevin Youkilis made a November appearance at the Lowell Spinners' alumni dinner. Tim Wakefield received an award for community service in New York. New acquisitions John Lackey and Jeremy Hermida joined Youkilis and several minor leaguers at the Boston baseball writers' dinner in mid-January. Reporters have caught up with Daniel Bard, Clay Buchholz and Jonathan Papelbon by phone to find out how their offseasons have gone. There are ways for fans to keep tabs on their favorite players.

Nothing, though, beats seeing them in person. That's been virtually impossible for fans without special access or without the means to fork over a Benjamin Franklin or two. Even the "New Stars for Young Stars" autograph event required fans to purchase a $150 ticket for admission -- and the most prominent player to attend was middle reliever Manny Delcarmen.

(It is important to note that the proceeds from the above events went to charity. A good cause, however, doesn't make the price any less steep.)

The most prominent player to attend the Hot Stove, Cool Music roundtable with Peter Gammons and Theo Epstein was Tampa Bay first baseman Carlos Pena. Not a single Red Sox player was there. Fans purchasing tickets to the Lowell Spinners' dinner even were advised that Youkilis would not be signing autographs.

Is that strange? Should it be?

The Red Sox enjoy one of the largest and most passionate fan bases in the major leagues. Fenway Park has sold out its 38,000-plus seats for more than 500 straight games. Red Sox fans flock to Camden Yards in Baltimore and Tropicana Field in Tampa Bay and the Rogers Centre in Toronto when they can't get tickets in Boston. Even National League stadiums are not immune.

During the season, though, it's not easy for fans to find ways to meet or collect autographs from their favorite players. Batting practice for the home team ends about 10 minutes after the Fenway Park gets open, and players rarely sign more than a couple of autographs on their way off the field. Spring training presents a great opportunity to meet players in an informal environment, but a March trip to Florida isn't exactly a cheap undertaking for a family.

Offseason events, then, seem to be the best chance for fans to get close to the team to which they devote so much time, energy and passion -- but those events start at $150 per person and don't even include the bulk of the players on the Red Sox roster.

Many other teams have the right idea. Here's a quick sampling of offseason events hosted by major-league teams this winter -- and commentary from the big names in attendance:

Baltimore ($10 for adults, $5 for kids): "Both Nick Markakis and Luke Scott used the winter to grow full-length beards, a style prohibited by the team's strict facial hair policy. Markakis took a lot of heat for his beard -- from peers and fans alike -- and said he was glad to be back in Baltimore."
Detroit ($14/$7): "I was here at about 9:15," pitcher Rick Porcello said, "and there was a line of fans wrapped around the corner."
Milwaukee ($15/$9): "All but three Brewers attended -- Craig Counsell already had a commitment for Sunday before he re-signed with the team, Todd Coffey was stuck in North Carolina by a snowstorm and Carlos Gomez has the flu."
Minnesota ($12/$6): "A line of fans stretched nearly 40 yards behind Joe Mauer, following the Twins catcher as he tried to weave his way through the crowd on the Metrodome field on Friday night."
Seattle ($10/$5): "We talked to some of the fans during our autograph session and they were thanking us for what we did last year as a team, how much it meant to them and how it brought a spark into getting into the Mariners," reliever Mark Lowe said. (New acquisition Chone Figgins highlighted the list of attendees.) "That was good to hear. You don't expect something like that to come out of a fan's mouth."
San Francisco (free): Scheduled for Saturday. Attendees to include Tim Lincecum and Pablo Sandoval as well as former players Vida Blue and Will Clark and prospects Madison Bumgarner and Buster Posey.
Tampa Bay (free admission, $20 for autographs) Scheduled for Feb. 20. From last year's event: "You can feel the energy in here," said Rays left fielder Carl Crawford, wearing a broad smile as he signed autographs. "You can tell it's different than the past. I hope we can take some of this momentum into the season."

The Atlanta Braves did not hold an on-site festival, but their winter caravan includes appearances by stars like Yunel Escobar, Tommy Hanson, Chipper Jones and Brian McCann. Jones and Tim Hudson, in fact, will be at the Publix Supermarket in Marietta, Ga., at 4:30 p.m. today.

Not every team made it particularly easy for fans to meet their favorite players and collect a few autographs. The St. Louis Cardinals held a widely attended "Winter Warm-Up" program in early January that cost $40 for adults and $10 for kids. An extra autograph ticket was required for 22 of the players in attendance, including Matt Holliday ($100), Chris Carpenter ($50) and -- this is incredible -- Brad Penny ($10).

The Yankees, of course, hold no such event -- apart from taking the World Series trophy on a trip with team executives on a tour of Tokyo, Beijing and Hong Kong. The Mets and Phillies, two other Northeast teams with passionate fan bases, likewise do nothing of the kind in their home cities.

That tends to be the exception.

Instead of anything like the above events, the Red Sox put together the "Red Sox Road Trip" featuring, as its most prominent face, Wally the Green Monster. The point of the caravan into all six New England states was to distribute more than 6,000 ticket vouchers -- vouchers good for "the guaranteed purchase" of two regular-season tickets.

"Similar to last year's highly successful trip, this road trip will give us a chance to visit our loyal fans in their towns and say a special thank you for their unwavering commitment," Red Sox executive Sam Kennedy said in a press release announcing the event. "As we bring the warmth of baseball and thoughts of spring to our fans during these cold winter days, we hope that the ticket vouchers we deliver will enable them to join us at Fenway Park for what promises to be an exciting 2010 season."

That's right: The ticket vouchers are good for the purchase of two regular-season tickets. The tickets aren't free. The tickets aren't even discounted in any way. The vouchers simply allow the holder to purchase full-price tickets in advance of the general public to one regular-season game.

To recap: A Giants fan need only show up at AT&T Park on Saturday to get an autograph from Tim Lincecum -- free of charge. Should a Red Sox fan want to shake the hand of Jacoby Ellsbury or Dustin Pedroia, though, he or she had better book a trip down to Fort Myers, Fla., and hope he or she is in the right place when the right players make themselves available.

The best they can do otherwise is to see Wally the Green Monster and receive a piece of paper that entitles them to buy two tickets at full price. It's a wonder receipt of the voucher doesn't come with a contractual obligation to buy hot dogs and beer.

At least you can listen to Dustin Pedroia on WEEI, right?

Older hitters still valuable in short deals

In the post-steroid, post-amphetamine, post-supplement era, older players have lost much of their appeal in the free-agent market. Teams are increasingly wary of being burned by 36- or 37-year-old players whose abilities on defense are eroding and whose speed on the basepaths is declining.

Bobby Abreu could barely get a sniff last winter. Former Red Sox outfielder Johnny Damon seems to have overplayed his hand this winter.

FanGraphs, among others, has started to wonder if older players are going to become the next market inefficiency.

The idea of a market inefficiency, after all, isn't to find the best players. The "Moneyball" Athletics worshipped at the altar of on-base percentage not because it was the only way to win games but because it was the way to get the most bang for their buck. The Seattle Mariners got better through improved defense because no one else knew who Franklin Gutierrez even was.

The goal of any team should be to maximize contribution per dollar. The more bang for the buck, the better. Even for a deep-pocketed team like the Red Sox, bang for the buck means something -- and it'll mean even more in coming years when the salaries of Jacoby Ellsbury, Jon Lester, Jonathan Papelbon, Dustin Pedroia and Kevin Youkilis all start to climb past $10 million a season.

The issue with older players, of course, is the fear of getting burned. The Detroit Tigers faced this issue with the $18 million option for Magglio Ordonez they tried halfheartedly to keep from vesting. Ordonez OPS'ed .804 last season, a respectable number but certainly not one worth $18 million a season.

According to FanGraphs, Ordonez was worth 1.8 wins above replacement last season. Abreu was worth 2.5 wins above replacement last season. Damon was worth 3.0 wins above replacement last season -- and he hasn't been worth less than 2.2 since the statistic started being compiled eight years ago.

Ordonez is an example of the danger in paying too much to older players. Abreu and Damon are examples of the danger of shying away too much from older players.

Damon still can hit. The 37-year-old outfielder thrived in the friendly confines of Yankee Stadium last season but still OPS'ed .795 on the road, including an on-base percentage of .349. His walk rate stayed above 10 percent for the fourth straight season. He saw more than 4.0 pitches per plate appearance for the fourth straight season.

Damon might be 10 years older than Jeremy Hermida, but the odds are pretty good that he would outproduce Hermida in the same amount of playing time. Even better, he'll probably earn about the same salary. One would like to believe that if the contract of David Ortiz had expired, Theo Epstein already would have snapped up Damon to be his designated hitter next season.

The contract of Ortiz does expire after the 2010 season, and there's almost no chance the Red Sox pick up the $12.5 million team option for 2011. That's when Epstein will have a chance to exploit the new market inefficiency.

Epstein by then might have made a trade for San Diego's Adrian Gonzalez or Detroit's Miguel Cabrera. Instead of investing $100 million in one of those two sluggers, though, it might be worth trawling for older players on one- or two-year contracts, players who can provide two-thirds of the production at one-third the cost.

One such player, actually, could be Ortiz himself.

Adam Dunn could be another. Much like Abreu and Damon, Dunn will be on the wrong side of 30 and bring little defensive value when he hits the open market after the 2010 season. Predicting the market is next to impossible, of course, but there's a good chance Dunn and Ortiz both get the Abreu/Damon treatment in the new defense-is-paramount age of baseball.

Dunn has OBP'ed better than .380 in five of his last six seasons. He's slugged better than .500 in five of his last six seasons. His OPS of .928 last season ranked him ahead of Jason Bay, J.D. Drew and Matt Holliday.

He's been worth just 1.2 wins above replacement in each of the last two seasons, but that number factors in his miserable defense. If an American League team -- say, the Red Sox -- needed a designated hitter, Dunn could provide tremendous production at a fraction of the cost of Cabrera or Gonzalez.

Saving Buchholz saved money long-term

(A discussion broken out of the Josh Beckett contract post.)

As it turned out, the Red Sox didn't lose much by leaving Clay Buchholz in the minor leagues until late July. Even as well as he pitched down the stretch, it's almost inconceivable that he alone could have made up the eight-win difference between the Red Sox and the Yankees in the regular-season standings -- and thus have changed the outcome of the season in any meaningful way.

And by leaving Buchholz in the minor leagues until late July, the Red Sox probably saved themselves $3 million during the 2011 season and maybe even more beyond that.

Buchholz, of course, is subject to the same salary structure that limits the earning power of younger players in both leagues. Until a player has the equivalent of three full seasons of service time in the major leagues, his salary can be set by his team. That salary normally is close to the major-league minimum, which will be $400,000 during the 2010 season.

Once a player has three full seasons of service time, he can file for salary arbitration -- and with that enjoy increased leverage depending on what an arbitrator might be expected to award him based on his service time and his achievement to date. Arbitration salaries tend to increase over time even if players' production does not: Jeremy Hermida earned $2.25 million last season and will earn $3.345 million next season despite lackluster production, the main reason the Florida Marlins traded him to the Red Sox for next to nothing.

There's one exception to the rule: Super Twos are players who have close to -- but not quite -- three years of service time in the major leagues. To qualify, a player must have two seasons plus 86 days of service time and rank among the top 17 percent of players with between two and three seasons of service time.

One season is defined as 172 days of service time. The cutoff, according to Cot's Baseball Contracts, tends to fall somewhere around two years and 130 days, but it varies year to year.

Super Twos are eligible for arbitration as though they'd completed their third full season -- and, as you can imagine, can cost their respective teams some money. Tim Lincecum might be the best example: The Giants called him up in early May in 2007 and, of course, never sent him back. The righty finished last season with two seasons plus 148 days of service time and thus is eligible for arbitration as a Super Two.

Had the Giants waited another three weeks to call Lincecum up to the major leagues, they'd be paying him less than $1 million in 2011. Instead, though, the two-time Cy Young Award winner filed with an arbitrator for $13 million.

(This is why it's become so trendy for teams to call up their top prospects no earlier than Memorial Day -- and sometimes later. The Atlanta Braves and Baltimore Orioles did it last season with Tommy Hanson and Matt Wieters, respectively. The Washington Nationals likely will do the same this season with Stephen Strasburg.)

Here's where Buchholz becomes relevant: The 25-year-old righty finished last season with one year and 59 days of major-league service time. Even if he spends the entire 2010 season in the major leagues, it's impossible for him to finish with more than two years and 59 days of major-league service time -- well below the Super Two plateau.

Had he started last season in the major leagues, he would have lined himself up for Super Two status in the 2011 season. Another 70 days of major-league service time -- about 2 1/2 months -- would have been enough to get him within striking range of arbitration eligibility.

Instead, though, Buchholz will be paid a salary close to the major-league minimum both in 2010 and 2011 before his service-time clock starts to kick in.

Lincecum, of course, is a special case. Barring a quantum leap forward in performance, Buchholz isn't going to see that type of money. But here's a look at several more similar pitchers eligible for arbitration for the first time and what they'll earn next season -- or, at least, what they and their team will take to the arbitration table should they fail to reach a settlement:

Brian Bannister: $2.3 million
Chad Billingsley: $3.85 million
John Danks: $3.45 million
Matt Garza: $3.35 million*
Jeremy Guthrie: $2.3-3.625 million
Joe Saunders: $3.6-3.85 million
Jered Weaver: $4.265 million
*Super Two

Beckett, for the sake of comparison, agreed to a deal worth $2.4 million in his first arbitration-eligible season and $4.325 million in his second arbitration-eligible season. Before he could get to arbitration again, he signed an extension that paid him $6 million in what would have been his third arbitration-eligible season.

Had the Red Sox missed the playoffs by a game or two, games in which Buchholz could have made a difference in April and May, that $3 million or so wouldn't look like much.

Just ask the Yankees, though, what a difference $3 million can make.