EagleTribune.com : Blogs : Burt Talks Sports

I think if the Orioles let the kid go for the complete game we lose 5-0. I'd say they'll be asking questions in Baltimore...but that would actually require somebody there to care about baseball :)

It's easy after the fact to say why a pitcher wasn't left in. Heck, we heard that against the A's when Jonathan Papelbon blew his first save by giving up a game-tying homer. Believe it or not, but some people said, "Why didn't Francona leave Okajima in for the ninth inning."
Your closer is not supposed to blow a five-run lead, with one out, in the ninth inning. Period.
I probably would have left Guthrie in, to get the complete game in dominant fashion, but I wasn't shocked he was pulled.

Well, to get back to the question at hand, it did feel like it was that kind of turning point, or moment when you realize that this team can do something special. Kind of like the A-Rod-Tek-Billy Mueller game in 2004 (even though the team floundered for another couple of weeks afterwards). However, the fact that Beckett had a reappearance of his blister problems and seems realistically doubtful for at least his next start, puts a serious damper on the excitement that the stunning win engendered.

To me, its critical that Beckett
A) Never revert to last year's model
B) Continue to avoid the DL while being the best pitcher in the rotation.

I'm glad that we've reached a season high eight game lead, because heading into Detroit, Atlanta and the Yankees, I feel much less confident if Beckett is on the shelf. This also makes it difficult to do what I'd hoped, which is run the dagger through the Yankees before Clemens even reports for duty/his part-time gig.

I'm going to hope we can get the lead over ten games by the time Clemens returns, but I'm not sure we'll accomplish that without Beckett.

Dan
It was the kind of game, which was pathetically boring for nearly three hours, that may be a defining moment, as you stated about the ARod-Varitek skirmish in 2004.
I think it's more important for the secondary guys, like Lugo and Drew, who are Red Sox newbies, as well as Cora, Hinske and Pena to feel a part of the winning.
Schilling, Ortiz and Manny have been there before. They are part of the 2004 core group. But, as Belichick says so often, each year is a different team. And this might be their defining moment.

I totally agree with Dan on the Beckett issue. He has been our stud of the rotation and basically looked unhittable throughout the beginning of this year. If he doesn't come out yesterday he still may have not picked up the win the way that kid from baltimore was throwin, but to put this division away and continue to win every series they play the sox are going to need Beckett. I would rather they play this one safe and make him miss his next start against the braves. I mean no matter how good the braves think they are, its still the national league and last year the sox absolutely dominated the NL. i would rather they get beckett back for new york next week. If we can push the lead to 10-12 games before roger gets back it will be a mental blow to a floundering new york team.

Bill, how long before Lester takes that spot from julian?

Liam, on Lester, it is inevitable that he will be in the Red Sox starting rotation. He threw 40 pitches in the bullpen yesterday and is slated for another 40 to 60 pitches on Wednesday. Again, the Sox have the best record in baseball so my guess is later rather than sooner. Why rush. I believe he is a star in the making. Remember, he is only 23, and he would be their only lefty starter, which makes him very, very important against the New York You-Know-Whos. My guess is he will do at least two starts in Pawtucket and be re-evaluated. It could be early to mid-June.
As for Beckett, with a 25-11 record, expect the Red Sox go wait this out until they are sure. I agree, there is no rush. The way the Red Sox were talking yesterday, I would be surprised if he missed more than a start. We will know more tomorrow, about 48 hours after the skin injury, according to a doctor friend.

I was SHOCKED when Guthrie was pulled. He'd thrown fewer than 100 pitches and had made the sox look foolish the whole day. I can see pulling him if he gives up a double or something, but why pull the pitcher when the catcher drops the ball? Even with the baserunner, you're looking at inning ending DP potential now: Ortiz had already hit into one that day, and Guthrie had been getting nothing but ground balls.

I mean, the guy basically didn't allow a runner to reach third, and you PULL HIM? The second he came out of the game I looked at my girlfriend and said "They have a chance now".

I understand you've got to protect your pitching staff, but very many people have had successful careers pitching many complete games over the years, and 10 more pitches wasn't going to kill this kid. It was asinine to take him out of that game..... but I'll take a mark in the win column any way it wants to come.

Patrick, were you really shocked? I'm not any more. Other than Roy Halladay in Toronto, every pitcher in the league babied like royalty. I would have left the kid. Dick Williams would have left the kid in ... you get the picture. Anyway, if you are afraid your bullpen is going to blow a five-run lead then it doesn't matter if you leave him. Your team is going nowhere, which is probably true of the Orioles.