Crisp’s last stand

Your blood must run ice-cold if you don’t feel for Coco Crisp, losing his job in the middle of the post-season. So of all the many highlights from last night’s game, I thought the best — well, OK, tied with Pedroia’s home run, and just barely ahead of Papelbon’s shutting down the Indians in the eighth — was Crisp’s running into the wall to grab the final out.

And what about Daisuke? The Sox can’t make it through the Series with just two starters, and it looks as though Matsuzaka has rediscovered enough of his talent at least to keep the game close. Just in time.

Discover more from Media Nation

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

15 thoughts on “Crisp’s last stand”

  1. Iqf they are good, two starters is plenty. The D-Backs did it in 2001 with Schilling starting three games and Johnson starting two and coming out of the bullpen in Game 7.As Whitey Herzog used to say, “In a short series, depth don’t count.”

  2. Mike: Unless Francona decides to use Beckett on three days’ rest, it’s not going to happen. Daisuke will start Game 3 and Wakefield Game 4, with Beckett coming back in Game 5 on his normal four days’ rest. In other words, the Sox need a third decent starter. Not sure about the relevance of your example, since the Sox have no one who’s going to start three games.

  3. I love Coco, but I’ll take Exciting Ellsbury over Cold Coco any day. And Coco is cold cold cold. I’m glad Terry made the switch, but if Ellsbury struggles, I wouldn’t be surprised to see Terry switch back. I’m not particularly concerned with our pitching. I’m way more concerned with our bats falling asleep, which seems to happen to the Sox from time to time. They woke up just in time vs Cleveland.I’ve never been scared of the Yankees, or any team in particular. But I’m always apprehensive about facing the HOT team (no matter what the sport). The Rockies certainly have been that. I’m hoping that the layoff (and the snow!) has cooled off the Rockies, and their amazing streak will end.Sox in 6.

  4. Dan, while it would be preferable to get good contributions from Daisuke and Wakefield, Mike is right – Beckett and Schilling can get it done, if need be.I’d prefer that you were right about Coco, but I have a feeling we’ll see him platooning in CF, particularly against their lefty starters, Francis and Morales (despite Ellsbury’s ridiculously good numbers against lefties).

  5. Any residents of Media Nation thinking of heading out to Denver for games 3 and 4 (5 if necessary)? Airfare and hotels look pretty reasonable, game tickets are off the charts at the moment but my (3 Superbowls only ) experience is they can be had outside the stadium prior to the game. Just curious if anyone is thinking about heading out. I also have a call into Games Away Tours in Boston and while they have no firm packages yet, they are guessing $2500 for two games hotel and airfare. Dan, plenty of good mountain climbing in CO between games.

  6. (Not sure why this didn’t go through the first time.)Dan, of course they’d have to go on short rest. But the point is that it happens all the time. In 2001, as I noted. In 2003, both in the NLCS and the WS, Beckett went on short rest. And pitched great, I might add. There’s no reason why, with the WS at stake, he wouldn’t start three times this year. (And don’t be surprised if you don’t see Wakefield at all.)On another note, did you catch Shaughnessy’s goof this morning? His piece read, “Datingto the historic sweep of the Yankees in 2004, it marked the seventh consecutive elimination game won by the Red Sox.”This, of course, is incorrect. The Red Sox lost Game 3 of the 2005 ALDS, and were thus eliminated by the White Sox. The Globe has since fixed the website.

  7. Mike: We have to assume that Francona put just as much value on winning the Cleveland series as he does the World Series. So we also have to assume that he didn’t start Beckett on three days’ rest either because (1) Beckett was gassed after Game 1 or (2) he didn’t want to risk an injury to his ace. Which leads to a final assumption — that Francona’s going to keep Beckett on normal rest in the World Series. If he doesn’t, then I’m really going to wonder what Wakefield in Game 4 against the Indians was all about.

  8. . . . Or, because he only wanted to use Beckett on short rest if necessary, which it wasn’t.

  9. What are you talking about? By using Wakefield — injured and rusty — in Game 4, Francona gambled that the Sox wouldn’t go down three games to one. And he lost. Maybe Tito knew the Sox were going to come back from a 3-1 deficit???

  10. My guess is that Francona felt Wakefield was ready to go for Game 4, and was gave the Sox at least as good a shot at winning as Paul Byrd did for the Indians. That would — remember, we didn’t know then what we do now — leave the rest of the matchups intact: Beckett vs. Sabathia in Game 5 and (if needed), Schilling v. Carmona. There’s no way the Sox trot Wakefield out there unless they felt he was ready to compete; not with Lester available (who had shut down the Indians earlier in the season). We’ll know more if Wake is left off the WS roster.But you seem to think they wouldn’t pitch Beckett on short rest. You must have missed him warming in the bullpen, and his post-game comments where he disclosed the game plan.

  11. I guess I got ice water in them veins. I can’t feel sorry for an underperforming multi-million-dollar centerfielder who gets benched. If this were June, maybe you let him play through it. But, as Dane Cook as made clear, this is October.

  12. Um. They did WIN the ALCS. And Beckett didn’t have to go on short rest. Meaning he’ll be all the more able to do so, if necessary, in the World Series.

  13. Congratulations! The Sox haven’t blown it yet. Hold your breath.

  15. Don (no longer) Fluffy said… Congratulations! The Sox haven’t blown it yet. Hold your breath.If there was any question Don’s sole purpose is to snark, let it end now.

Comments are closed.