Not for a GOOD reason. Research has shown many times that simple Run Average is a far better stat than ERA. Actually, I’m pretty sure it’s more predictive of future ERA than ERA itself is.

And have you seen Wakefield pitch? It’s not unfair to point out that he’s the worst pitcher imaginable, and I don’t mean that on a statistical level. Think about it like this: he’s the Anti-Buehrle. Buehrle isn’t amazing on a stuff level, but he’s basically the perfect pitcher. He commands well. He controls well. He can always throw a strike when he has too. He works fast. He fields his position extremely well. He controls the running game well. Wakefield is the exact opposite kind of pitcher. His knuckleball is still a good pitch, but he can’t do any of the little things that let a pitcher leverage good stuff into actual production on the field. He can’t throw a strike when he needs one. He can’t control the running game. He works excruciatingly slowly. He’s a stiff and immobile fielder. His higher-than-normal number of unearned runs is just one way this lack of ability manifests itself.

And by the way, don’t look at his career numbers to evaluate this. He wasn’t always this way. But age has a way of catching up with all of us, even the knuckleballers.

Am I saying that Wakefield was great last year? No, he clearly didn’t pitch very well. But the number of tries it took to achieve his 200th win doesn’t say anything about his performance. It was a stretch of bad luck, rather than particularly bad pitching.

Other than that, you have a point. (Although, in fairness to you, Matthew also uses this as an example of Wakefield pitching badly).

Pretty sure he would not have got those shots had there been other options. The sox kept trotting out Wake, Miller, and to a lesser extent Weiland.

God, Terry Francona is a great manager. Why did the Red Sox ever let him go?