If Johnny Damon Were Derek Jeter

We interrupt your regularly scheduled blog on the Mets to bring you this PSA (pretty solid argument). In case you're that guy in the Geico commercial who lives under a rock, let me announce to you that Derek Jeter collected his 3,000th hit yesterday. He became the second player to reach that milestone by hitting a home run (Wade Boggs was the other) and the second player to collect five hits in the same game (after Craig Biggio accomplished the feat in 2007).

We're not trying to diminish the fact that Jeter got to 3,000 hits. It's a fantastic lifetime achievement and he deserves to be congratulated for it. But there's another player who's approaching the milestone that doesn't get nearly the love and the accolades reserved for a player of Jeter's stature. He's a contemporary of Jeter and has career numbers that are very similar to the Yankee shortstop. So tell me something. Why doesn't Johnny Damon get the respect bestowed upon Derek Jeter?

Whether on the Royals, A's, Red Sox, Yankees, Tigers or Rays, Johnny Damon has been as consistent as they come.

Both Derek Jeter and Johnny Damon made their major league debuts during the 1995 season, with Jeter playing his first game for the Yankees on May 29 and Damon collecting his first at-bat for the Kansas City Royals on August 12. The following season (1996), both became everyday players on their respective teams.

Let's go through their career numbers to compare the two players.

As of July 9, Derek Jeter has 3,003 hits, which include 481 doubles, 62 triples and 237 HR. Johnny Damon has 2,663 hits, racking up 502 doubles, 104 triples and 224 HR.

Derek Jeter has scored 1,727 runs and has driven in 1,159 runs. Johnny Damon has crossed the plate 1,606 times and has 1,088 RBI.

Jeter has also reached base via the walk 972 times, while Damon has drawn 955 bases on balls. However, Jeter has struck out 1,605 times during his career, while Damon has fanned on 1,182 occasions.

In addition, Jeter has stolen 331 bases in 419 attempts (79.0% success rate), while Damon has stolen 392 bases in 493 attempts (79.5% success rate).

Derek Jeter's career batting average, on-base percentage and slugging percentage are .313/.383/.450, respectively, while Johnny Damon holds a career .287/.354/.436 mark in those categories.

Jeter has grounded into 241 double plays in his career, while Damon has been victimized by a twin killing only 91 times.

If you look at the individual regular season numbers, their careers are very similar, with Jeter leading Damon in some categories, Damon leading Jeter in other categories, and the two of them having almost identical numbers in several others. Now let's dissect those same numbers a little differently over their entire careers.

Derek Jeter has scored 100+ runs in 13 different seasons. Johnny Damon has accomplished that feat 10 times, with two other seasons in which he scored 93 and 95 runs. In those two seasons (2007 and 2008), Damon missed 21 games (93 runs in 141 games) and 19 games (95 runs in 143 games).

Jeter has had eight seasons with at least 30 doubles. Damon has 11 such seasons, including nine consecutive years in which he compiled 30 or more doubles (1998-2006).

Derek Jeter has never reached double digits in triples in any season (he hit a career-high nine triples in 1999). Damon has hit at least 10 triples in a season three times, including a league-leading 11 three-base hits in 2002.

Both Derek Jeter and Johnny Damon have hit at least 20 HR in a season three times, and both have career highs of 24 HR in a single season, with Jeter accomplishing his high mark in home runs in 1999 and Damon hitting his career-high in 2006 and again in 2009.

Although Derek Jeter's career-high in RBI is 102, while Damon has never driven in more than 94 runs in a single season, Jeter has surpassed the 80 RBI mark in a season only three times, while Damon has done it four times.

In the patience category, Jeter has walked as many as 60 times in a season eight times. Damon has 11 such seasons. On the opposite extreme, Jeter has struck out at least 99 times in a dozen different campaigns. Why is 99 such an important number? Because Johnny Damon has never struck out that many times in a single season. His career high in strikeouts in 98, accomplished in 2009 as Jeter's teammate with the Yankees.

Johnny Damon beat 'em, then he joined 'em.

Speaking of teammates, let's look at those four years (2006-2009) when Derek Jeter and Johnny Damon shared the same clubhouse in the Bronx. During that time, these were Derek Jeter's numbers, followed by Johnny Damon's stats:

• Derek Jeter: .325 batting average, .394 on-base percentage, .453 slugging percentage, 415 runs scored, 130 doubles, 11 triples, 55 HR, 305 RBI, 90 SB, 249 BB, 377 K.

• Johnny Damon: .285 batting average, .363 on-base percentage, .458 slugging percentage, 410 runs scored, 125 doubles, 15 triples, 77 HR, 296 RBI, 93 SB, 268 BB, 344 K.

Jeter had a favorable edge in batting average and on-base percentage while they were in the same batting order and had a few more runs scored (five), doubles (five) and RBI (nine) than Damon. However, Damon had more triples, home runs, stolen bases and walks than Jeter, while striking out 33 fewer times.

Before you say "so what?", let it be known that during the four years used in the above comparison, Jeter played in 47 more games than Damon (613 for Derek, 576 for Johnny) and had nearly 300 more plate appearances (2,813 for Jeter, 2,525 for Damon), meaning that Damon would more than likely have had far batter cumulative numbers than Jeter during the time they were teammates, and would also have surpassed him in doubles, runs scored and RBI, the three categories Jeter had a slight edge in.

In the two years since they stopped being teammates, Damon has surpassed Jeter in almost every offensive category, including batting average, on-base percentage and doubles, as shown below:

• Derek Jeter: .270 batting average, .337 on-base percentage, .365 slugging percentage, 153 runs scored, 43 doubles, four triples, 13 HR, 91 RBI, 26 SB, 87 BB, 139 K.

• Johnny Damon: .274 batting average, .344 on-base percentage, .412 slugging percentage, 123 runs scored, 51 doubles, nine triples, 17 HR, 92 RBI, 18 SB, 89 BB, 134 K.

Once again, Jeter had more plate appearances in those two seasons (1,056) than Damon (968), so the categories in which Damon trailed Jeter might be much closer if Damon had had the opportunities that Jeter was afforded, and of course, the categories in which Damon already had the edge over Jeter would have a much greater difference.

Derek Jeter has five World Series rings to Johnny Damon's two. Jeter has also been selected to 12 All-Star teams to Damon's two and has finished in the top 20 in the MVP voting nine times to Damon's four. Jeter has accomplished these awards and accolades despite having very similar career numbers to Johnny Damon.

So why doesn't Johnny Damon get the respect he apparently deserves? Derek Jeter has played his entire career in a powerful Yankee lineup. Johnny Damon played from 1995-2000 in Kansas City and played one season in Oakland. Those teams were not exactly known for being offensive juggernauts. Johnny Damon was one of the few bright spots on those teams. (Carlos Beltran was another on those late '90s Royals teams. See, I was able to mention a Mets player after all.)

Yet, despite his success in Kansas City and Oakland, he did not receive any attention at all from a baseball standpoint until he became a self-proclaimed "idiot" in Boston. It was in Boston that he became an All-Star for the first time and it was with Boston that he won his first championship, hitting .467 in the 2004 ALCS and smacking the game-changing grand slam against Derek Jeter's Yankees in the seventh and deciding game.

Johnny Damon will always be a legend in Boston, even if they think he's an idiot for becoming a Yankee.

Derek Jeter is a future Hall-of-Famer, of that there is no doubt. But when the topic of Johnny Damon's Hall of Fame candidacy comes up, all you hear is crickets or an occasional snicker. I'm not saying Johnny Damon is a better player than Derek Jeter. Both players are special in their own way.

But if you consider their entire careers, it would be difficult to say that Johnny Damon pales in comparison to the Yankee captain. Derek Jeter has had fantastic career numbers, both in the regular season and the post-season. But Johnny Damon is not that far behind. By the time both players call it a career, their numbers will be almost identical across the board.

At his current pace, Johnny Damon has a chance to reach the 3,000 hit plateau by the time he's 39 (in two seasons). Ordinarily, that warrants an automatic call to Cooperstown, yet hardly anyone would mention Johnny Damon and Hall of Fame in the same sentence.

Perhaps it's time for the people who have showered their love and respect upon Derek Jeter to take a look at one of his contemporaries. Johnny Damon might not have played his entire career in New York as Jeter has, but he's been as big a star as the Yankees' brightest player since 1995. Whether you agree or disagree with me, it's time to recognize the achievements of Johnny Damon. He's certainly earned it.

If I saw this ad when I was a kid, I'd be in the Navy NOW!

Seriously, Fred Lynn AND Jim Rice telling me to join the Navy?
Ahoy!

Where do I enlist?

Whitey Bulger maybe was a little too loyal to the Red Sox

Well Whitey Bulger (aka the real life guy that Jack Nicholson kind of played in The Departed) was on the run but still a Red Sox fan.

It turns out he was in plain sight in Santa Monica for years.
Do you know who was also in plain sight in Santa Monica for some of the same time?

ME!

Evidently he still was wearing a Red Sox cap when they found him.
A white Red Sox cap (you know... for Whitey.)

I've never been on the run from the FBI, but if I were, I wouldn't wear a Sox cap.
I'd wear a Yankee cap just to throw the feds off.

But hey, Whitey was a loyal fan.
I wonder if we ever went to Sonny McLean's in Santa Monica together.

The Red Sox honor Chuck Stobbs

Like with every team in baseball this evening, the Red Sox players all wore #42. It is a unique gesture from the Red Sox on this Jackie Robinson Day.

Remember, the Red Sox were the first team to give Jackie a try out. Back in the mid 1940s the Red Sox had Robinson and Sam Jethroe play for scouts at Fenway Park. Supposedly someone yelled "Get that ni--er off the field."

Seeing the Red Sox lost a racial discrimination suit 40 years later, I do not find the story to be outlandish.

The Red Sox had a chance to be the first team to integrate.
Instead, under the grip of the dreadful Yawkey family, they became the last.

The Red Sox could have lead the way in integration. Instead they were dragged kicking and screaming into it... up until the 1990s when Dan Duqette discovered that the Red Sox didn't even send scouts to the Dominican Republic.

In 1947, while Jackie Robinson changed history in Brooklyn wearing number 42, Chuck Stobbs was a pitcher for the Red Sox.

He wore #42 in Boston instead of Jackie.

Stobbs was 18 years old and a young phenom of a left handed pitcher. His career never blossomed and he is best remembered as a member of the Senators when he let up a 560 foot homer to Mickey Mantle that brought about the term "Tape Measure Shot."

He became a minor league coach before passing away in Florida a few years ago.

He wore the number 42 with pride for the Red Sox.
That's almost as good as having Jackie Robinson, isn't it?

Ladies and Gentlemen... the Red Sox are the worst team in baseball!

Did Kyle Farnsworth really shut the Red Sox down?

THAT Kyle Farnsworth? The guy with great stuff who constantly was beaten like an egg? He shut down Jacoby Ellsbury, J. D. Drew and David Ortiz 1-2-3 in a one run game?

Did the Red Sox blow ANOTHER well pitched game by Jon Lester?

Yeah yeah yeah, I know it is only April. But need I remind you of 1996? The Red Sox were the defending Division Champs, but dropped the first 5 games of the year.

By April 17th, they were 2-12.
They were still 10 games under .500 in June. But in the second half, they caught fire.

They went 22-9 in August,.
In the second half, they played at a .636 clip. No team was hotter in the second half.

Here's the problem. They finished the season 85-77, 3 games back of the Wild Card winning Orioles.

Imagine if they had a mediocre start. They would have probably made the playoffs.

It's early but ask the 1996 Red Sox if the games count.
Let's update the tally.

DODGED BULLET GAMES - 2

April 8 - 9-6 win against the Yankees. (The Sox end their 6 game losing streak with a slugfest. John Lackey stinks but Phil Hughes stinks even more.)
April 10 - 4-0 win against the Yankees. (Beckett and Sabathia duel in a game that was 1-0 until the late innings.)

TEETH GRINDER GAMES - 4

April 1 - 9-5 loss in Texas. (The Sox tie Opening Day in the 8th with an Ortiz homer only to have Bard implode and the Sox let up 4 in the bottom of the 8th.)

April 5 - 3-1 loss in Cleveland. (The Sox drop their 4th straight as the bats are dead in Cleveland.)
April 7 - 1-0 loss in Cleveland. (Sox blow a great Lester performance on a squeeze bunt and Darnell McDonald overrunning the bag to end the game.)
April 12 - 3-2 loss to Tampa Bay. (A solid Lester performance is wasted as Kyle Farnsworth of all people shuts down the Sox.)

Back down to -2.

Kevin Kennedy was inexplicably canned after the 1996 season.

I think Francona is fine but let's start winning. I don't want to have to make up those games later.

Note the time... I am saying warm up the bullpen

2 innings in and Lackey stinks with a capital stinks.
He has no command, no control and is throwing beach balls to the plate.

Get some one warm NOW.
Next time someone gets on second, Lackey goes to the showers.

This is not a second guess.

Crawford is leading off?

This is the 6th game and Carl Crawford's 4th position in the batting order.
Somehow Francona will be able to find a way to have him bat in 10 different spots.

Will the Red Sox-Yankees game be longer or shorter than Doctor Zhivago?

Doctor Zhivago clocks in at 200 minutes (3 hours, 20 minutes.)
John Lackey's control looks awful.

I am betting this game will be longer.

Phil Hughes might be just what the Red Sox need

Yeah the Red Sox have stunk and the Yankees are in town.
All could be awful if the Red Sox lose.

But guess who also stinks?
Phil Hughes.
He stunk the second half of last year, he stunk in the playoffs and he stunk in his first start.

So let's say the Yankees come into Fenway, Hughes stinks it up and the Red Sox get a win at home.

It will go a long way to healing some wounds in Boston.

LET'S GO SOX!

Questions for panicking Red Sox fans

1. With 156 games left, do you think the Red Sox have enough time to close the 4 game gap with the Yankees?

2. Do you think Kevin Youkilis will finish the season batting .105?

3. Will the Red Sox home record improve from 0-0?

4. Do you think that Blue Jays infielder Yunel Escobar is going to win the batting title? He currently leads the AL with a .474 average.

5. While the Red Sox are slumping, the Orioles are in first place in the East, the Indians and Royals are tied for first in the Central (with the Royals playing the most exciting baseball in the majors) and the Pirates are a 1 1/2 games out of first in the NL Central. Should those teams be printing playoff tickets?


CALM DOWN!!!!!!!

Are you KIDDING ME?????

So it has come to this.
6 losses to no wins.

And this was a game where the Red Sox could have won about a dozen times.
Jon Lester was dealing. They got some men on base. They got a great catch on a bunt by Jarrod Saltalamacchia.

And they faced Fausto Carmona, who let up 10 runs in 3 innings against the White Sox in his only start of the year.

Yes. I just wrote 10 runs.

NATURALLY he shut the Red Sox down.

OF COURSE the Indians drove in the only run on a squeeze play.

And HOW MANY TIMES did I have to hear the sentence "He hit into the shift" whenever Ortiz or Gonzalez came to bat?

Hey guys! If they are shifting on you, then BUNT THE OTHER WAY! The Red Sox need to do ANYTHING to get some hits, including me TYPING words in CAPS to DRIVE HOME MY POINT!

Now I am not sure if Darnell McDonald was safe or not in that last play, but the umpire was right to call him out... just on principle alone.

Let's update the tally.

DODGED BULLET GAMES - 0

TEETH GRINDER GAMES - 3

April 1 - 9-5 loss in Texas. (The Sox tie Opening Day in the 8th with an Ortiz homer only to have Bard implode and the Sox let up 4 in the bottom of the 8th.)

April 5 - 3-1 loss in Cleveland. (The Sox drop their 4th straight as the bats are dead in Cleveland.)
April 7 - 1-0 loss in Cleveland. (Sox blow a great Lester performance on a squeeze bunt and Darnell McDonald overrunning the bag to end the game.)


-3.
An 0-6 record.
The Yankees coming into town.

Could this scenario be worse?
I guess I should be thankful that the team isn't riddled with injuries.

Then again, how could a team full of Pawtucket Red Sox have a worse record than THIS crew?

I am not feeling well... but I am doing better than the Red Sox

I am having an allergy attack.
My head is stuffed up.
I feel like the guy whose head was in a vice in Casino.

I can barely breathe.

And yet I still feel healthier than the Red Sox.

Neither Dice-K nor Beckett pitched BADLY. This team is just dead from the neck up.

Something has got to give soon. I know it is early, but you can't afford to give away whole WEEKS!

OK, off to bed.

Achoo.

You Call This A Rivalry?

New York and Philadelphia are separated by less than 100 miles, making the Phillies the closest geographical rivals to the Mets in the National League. However, upon further inspection of the NL East standings over the past half-century, "rivals" might not be the correct word to use.

Since the Mets came into existence in 1962, both the Phillies and the Mets have finished with a winning record in the same season a mere eight times.

• 1975: Phillies (86-76, 2nd place); Mets (82-80, 3rd place)
• 1976: Phillies (101-61, 1st place); Mets (86-76, 3rd place)
• 1986: Mets (108-54, 1st place); Phillies (86-75, 2nd place)
• 2001: Phillies (86-76, 2nd place); Mets (82-80, 3rd place)
• 2005: Phillies (88-74, 2nd place); Mets (83-79, 3rd place)
• 2006: Mets (97-65, 1st place); Phillies (85-77, 2nd place)
• 2007: Phillies (89-73, 1st place); Mets (88-74, 2nd place)
• 2008: Phillies (92-70, 1st place); Mets (89-73, 2nd place)

Meanwhile, over the same time period, other well-known traditional rivals have had much more of a rivalry. Since 1962, the Red Sox and Yankees have both finished with winning records in the same season 30 times, including each of the last 13 seasons. The Dodgers and Giants have both been above .500 in the same season 22 times since 1962. Even the Cubs and Cardinals have both finished with winning records in the same season 14 times in the past half-century, which is remarkable considering that the Cubs have only had 18 winning seasons overall since 1962.

Prior to 2007, the Mets and Phillies never had a bonafide rivalry. Although the two teams finished in first and second place in the NL East in both 1986 and 2006, the Mets won the division handily each time. Not until the back-to-back collapses suffered by the Mets in 2007 and 2008 did the teams play for a division title. Unfortunately, those two seasons were the only two in which the Mets and Phillies had a legitimate rivalry in the standings, as the Phillies continued winning in 2009 and 2010, while the Mets forgot how to do so.

Therefore, although it is very early in the season, when the 3-1 Mets take on the 3-1 Phillies tonight at Citizens Bank Park, it will mark one of the few times over the past half-century that both teams have been in the top two positions in the NL East as they played each other.

It may be silly to say that tonight's game is a battle for first place, but why not say it? After all, battles for division supremacy between the Mets and the Phillies have been about as rare as the Cubs winning the World Series. But at least the Cubs have more of a rivalry with another divisional foe.

Enjoy seeing tonight's first place showdown between the Mets and the Phillies while you can. It might be the only time we can say that this season.

Did anything GOOD happen tonght?

OK, the Red Sox are 0-4. You really can't do worse than that over 4 games. And oddly, Carl Crawford has hit in 5 different spots in the lineup. I could be wrong about that, but I don't think I am.

So, not to pull a "Besides that, Mrs. Lincoln how did you like the play?" but can we take anything positive from this?

Well, Beckett pitched OK. Not great, but you can totally pin this loss on him.

The bullpen looked good.

Saltalamacchia drove in a 2 out run.

Hey! Those are all cool.

And while a lot of people are bringing up the fact that no team has ever started the season 0-4 and gone on to win the World Series, I will point out that no team ever was down 0-3 in a best of 7 baseball series and wound up winning it.

There are 158 games to go and it takes one winning streak to make that all work out. Plus the Rays are 0-4 and the Yankees blew a late lead last night, so it is not like they are in an insurmountable situation. It isn't even MID April.

Maybe the Red Sox should play ONE home game before we panic.

And remember, over their first 5 games, the 1998 Yankees were 1-4. They finished OK.

So relax.

But I will update the tally.

DODGED BULLET GAMES - 0

TEETH GRINDER GAMES - 2

April 1 - 9-5 loss in Texas. (The Sox tie Opening Day in the 8th with an Ortiz homer only to have Bard implode and the Sox let up 4 in the bottom of the 8th.)

April 5 - 3-1 loss in Cleveland. (The Sox drop their 4th straight as the bats are dead in Cleveland.)

OK, -2 so far.

Let's rattle off 4 in a row and put this in the rear view mirror.

How can the Red Sox expect to score against a legend like Josh Tomlin?

Seriously, it's not fair. How can the Sox line up, a rag tag bunch of misfits, possibly get MORE than a run when Cy Young favorite Josh Tomlin is on the hill?

No wonder they sent J. D. Drew to the plate when he was thrown out. Runs are at a PREMIUM when Tomlin is on the hill.

The only question is will he win 30 games this year.

No shame in being completely shut down by him.
It's like facing Maddux in his prime. It is to be expected.

Josh Beckett... the earning of $15.75 million begins NOW

Seriously, it is time for Josh to be Josh again.

In my Star Trek movies to Josh Beckett chart, we should be due for Star Trek VI, which was good. (No really, it was.)

So let's get going... it's off to Cleveland, the site of Beckett's greatest triumph as a member of the Red Sox.

Remember? In 2007, he became the American Bad Ass! The Sox were down 3-1 and Cleveland was on the verge of winning the pennant and CC Sabathia was on the mound.

Beckett calmly and carefully reduced the Indians to rubble, forcing the series back to Boston.

He didn't care that the Indians ace was on the hill.
He didn't care that Kenny Lofton tried to pick a fight with him.
He didn't care that they brought out his ex girlfriend to sing the national anthem.

He just won.

The stakes are not as high right now, but a streak stopping loss will go a long way to putting some confidence in Beckett.

Live long and prosper, Beckett and on to the Undiscovered Country!

Whose opening was worse? Charlie Sheen or the Red Sox?

There wasn't a lot of "Winning" going on with either one. In fact both flopped pretty dramatically.

I would argue that the Red Sox had a worse opening. Because with Charlie, what exactly could you possibly have expected the show to be?

He wasn't going to sing. Or dance. And clearly no writers were on tour to feed him lines. (Although it is safe to say Sheen had a LOT of lines before the show.)

So if you went to the show, you were expecting to see Charlie Sheen act like a deranged lunatic. And it sounds like he delivered.

Meanwhile the Red Sox were capable of something. They could have pitched. They could have hit. They could have kept a FEW balls in the yard.

Let me put it this way, nobody was picking Sheen's show to win a Tony Award, but a lot of people thought this Sox team was ready for a parade in November.

So I guess the one with Tiger blood indeed won again.
(How could his Tigers uniform not say "Tiger Blood" on it? That could have made the whole show work!)

My friend, the brilliant Christian Finnegan, Tweeted it best regarding the Sheen refunds.

"DECREE: Anyone wanting a Charlie Sheen refund must first make a public speech explaining his rationale for purchasing the ticket."

The REAL winners?
The writers of Two and a Half Men. They can say "It's not so easy, is it Mr. Warlock?"

Let's hope the Red Sox can start being more Hot Shots, Wall Street, Major League Charlie Sheen rather than "being an expensive and humiliating public disaster" Charlie Sheen.

I didn't want to win a game this weekend

I like starting a season in an 0-3 hole. It is more fun that way.

Seriously, this was a pretty lousy display by my Red Sox, picked by so many to go all the way. It was home run derby off of both Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz and frankly that makes me nervous.

I know it is against Texas and they are a good home run team. But what happened to "Good Pitching beats Good Hitting."

The Sox have an off day tomorrow and then Josh Beckett take the mound. Remember him? The guy who got lit up last year and this spring.

In terms of the "2011 Red Sox compared to hyped movies" template I made before the season started... this team is off like Superman Returns, the film where it just felt slightly off right from the beginning.

Let's hope things go up, up and away in Cleveland.

This is what I was afraid of with the Red Sox

At least there was no suspense in this game.

Yeah, I know it is early. But one reason I wasn't swept up in the pre season hype was I felt like there were too many assumptions about the starting rotation. Lester and Buchholz were written in ink and the assumption was either Lackey, Beckett or Dice-K were going to be bouncing back.

Well we had better HOPE so. John Lackey became John Lacking or John Shelacky. He gave the Sox 9... sadly it was 9 earned runs against.

I would like to NOT start the season being swept, especially with and off day on Monday and Josh Beckett's potentially agonizing first start of the year on Tuesday.

I know the Red Sox will eventually win a game. I'd like to not have to wait for it.

Is this any way to start a potential World Series season?

Seriously... the day after I write up my "What movies will this team mirror?" post, the give us this stinker?

It started out so well. Ellsbury reaching on a 2 base error and the Sox up 2-0 before the Rangers even came to the plate. They went up 4-2 and even after Lester coughed up a bunch of homers, still had a thrill with Big Papi tying the game.

And all of that got flushed down the toilet with a disastrous 8th inning. If this is what we are going to get from Daniel Bard this year then Jonathan Papelbon might have some terrific leverage.

Well the season has begun and I will also start my "Dodged Bullet/Teeth Grinder" tally.

DODGED BULLET GAMES - 0

TEETH GRINDER GAMES - 1

April 1 - 9-5 loss in Texas. (The Sox tie Opening Day in the 8th with an Ortiz homer only to have Bard implode and the Sox let up 4 in the bottom of the 8th.)

Starting the season -1 is no way to start a season.
Then again, they lost their first game in 2004 and 2007.