We’ve been over this before, but…
Jonny Gomes against RHP in 2013: .258/.341/.404 in 151 AB
Jonny Gomes against RHP career: .225/.310/.423 in 1,863 AB
Daniel Nava against RHP in 2013: .322/.411/.484 in 339 AB
Daniel Nava against RHP career: .292/.390/.443 in 657 AB
John Farrell knows these numbers. He played Nava over Gomes against right-handers all year as the Red Sox went about producing the American League’s best record. Yet something changed in October. It’s certainly nothing that Gomes has done in the batter’s box: his 0-for-4 in Thursday’s Game 2 loss left him 5-for-32 with two doubles and two RBI in the postseason.
But Farrell likes Gomes’ presence. He likes Gomes’ beard (who doesn’t?). He likes the way Gomes spies that willing reporter and manages to give a postgame interview every night.
And Farrell rode Gomes as a good-luck charm. Gomes even had Timmy McCarver singling him out as a “winner” tonight. The Red Sox were 7-0 when Gomes had started in the postseason, which is why he was making his fourth straight start tonight.
Hopefully, the spell is broken now, because lo and behold, the Red Sox might have found a match in a World Series for once. They can’t afford to continue starting the inferior player with the Cardinals throwing nothing but right-handers.
Look, here are all of the players to post higher OBPs against right-handed pitchers than Nava this season: Joey Votto, Shin-Soo Choo, David Ortiz, Mike Trout, Miguel Cabrera and Chris Davis. Those are pretty well known guys, right? Some might say it’s good company. Not only should Nava be starting against the Cardinals, but he should be hitting second in place of Shane Victorino. But maybe just work on the whole “getting him in the lineup at all” thing first.
Red Sox manager John Farrell just met the media and, predictably, he was asked about the substance which may or may not have appeared in Jon Lester’s glove. From the media tweets:
Fair enough. Not sure why rosin would appear sort of greenish and gelatinous, but there’s lots of things I don’t know.
This Boston Globe/Nick Cafardo interview with Bobby Valentine is going to get linked and tweeted about a lot today because, buried deep inside, Valentine opines that, had he stayed with the Red Sox for 2013, he thinks he could have turned the ship around. But to the extent people play the “OMG, look at what that deluded nut Valentine said!” game, they’re being pretty unfair to the guy.
Yes, he said he thinks he could have won with the 2013 Red Sox. But that little bit is surrounded by tons of high praise for John Farrell, Ben Cherington and the players on the 2013 Red Sox team. Indeed, if anything, this is about as magnanimous and un-self-centered a set of comments Valentine will ever offer when something directly related to him comes up. Here’s the entire quote:
“I’d like to think that if I came back for my second year that, given the changes and improvements, I would have been able to do the same thing,” Valentine said. “Ben did a great job this offseason rebuilding the team. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like it before. Usually a team will go after one or two free agents and hope they work out. When you’re signing seven or eight guys and they all work out and blend in together as well as they did, that’s amazing to me. The entire organization should be very proud of what they did. They should take a bow. It was amazing work.”
The “blending” thing — in addition to some more direct comments earlier — is clearly Valentine’s hats-off to Farrell. The comments about Cherington and the roster makeover are clear. The bit about “if I came back …” well, what do you expect him to say? “Really, Nick, if they brought me back this season it would have been like a flaming bag of crap on someone’s front porch. I mean, we woulda stunk on ice!” Of course the guy is going to say he could have done a better job. He’s a former athlete and all-around confident person. It’d be news if the guy was suddenly defeatist.
As it is: good on Valentine for offering praise in a situation where a lot of guys may have offered it more backhandedly or, more likely, declined comment at all. If anyone is playing the “Bobby V. said something crazy!” game with this, they’re misrepresenting the man.