Tim Wakefield has been stalled at 199 victories by an unusual run of bad luck. (AP)

With a slightly different series of events, Tim Wakefield’s chase of his 200th career victory would now long since be done. Instead, he might have been in position by now to be eying Roger Clemens and Cy Young for the top spot in the Red Sox’ victory chart.

Instead, at a time when he is nearing a point that should permit him to take a bow in his career, he is dealing with an uncomfortable delay. In his own words (following his fourth straight unfulfilled attempt at career win No. 200), “the Wake Watch” has commenced, in which the milestone is being obscured, in part, by the protracted journey to reach it.

Yet that isn’t a reflection of the pitcher’s performance. In four starts since claiming career victory No. 199 against the Mariners on July 24 (on a day when he allowed seven runs in 6 1/3 innings but received 12 runs of offensive support), Wakefield has enjoyed his most consistent stretch as a starter this year.

In four straight starts, he has pitched at least 6 2/3 innings while allowing four or fewer earned runs. He has a 4.08 ERA in that span.

Yet on a team that is second in the majors in both runs scored and runs per game, Wakefield has gone 0-2 with two no-decisions in those four games. To put that run in context, no Red Sox starter since Brad Penny in 2009 has been winless in four straight games in which he allowed four or fewer earned runs and pitched at least six innings in each outing. In order to find a streak of longer than four straight starts by a Sox pitcher that didn’t net a victory, you have to go back to a five-start stretch by Tomo Ohka in 2000.

It is part of a pattern that has existed throughout Wakefield’s Red Sox career. He now has 112 starts in which he has either been pinned with a loss (55 of those) or taken a no-decision (57) while pitching at least six innings and allowing four or fewer earned runs. Read the rest of this entry »

Peter Gammons

MLB and NESN analyst Peter Gammons joined the Mut & Merloni show Thursday to talk about the Roger Clemens mistrial, the All-Star Game and the latest with the Red Sox. To hear the interview, go to the Mut & Merloni audio on demand page.

“They are worrying more about steroids than they are about drunk drivers killing people,” Gammons said about the government and the Clemens trial. “It’s our tax dollars at work.”

He said he is surprised with Thursday’s developments that the trial has been declared a mistrial.

“I think it was a major surprise,” Gammons said. “A friend of mine who had been covering it, sent me an email saying the prosecution just blew its self up. They did a terrible job with it. It’s amazing. Rusty Hardin didn’t even need to pull the guns out, he was ready to go after Andy Pettitte and all sorts of people.”

Added Gammons: “A lot of people seeing Clemens and [Barry] Bonds get hung on all this, but just go, ‘All right, enough is enough, let’s move on.’ I sense that they had done that in San Francisco. I thought this trial would be a salacious and vicious trial. The fact that they were bringing Pettitte into it and the fact the prosecutors screwed it up on day one. You would laugh if they didn’t realize how much money they spent on this.”

Gammons also discussed the All-Star Game and how many people within the game were upset with players leaving the game early, or not showing up at all.

“It was bad for the game,” Gammons said. “I know the commissioner’s office was pretty upset with the way all this went down. So many players were out of there by the eighth inning and on their planes going home. I think most people, I know Bud [Selig]  is upset about it and he should be, were left with the impression it doesn’t really matter.

“That is a tough thing for baseball to overcome. I am told that there were some words between the commissioner’s office and the players association, that the players association is supposed to think everybody was hurt, but at the same time it did have that impression of, ‘OK, lets get this over with and see what happens.’ ”

Read the rest of this entry »

Former Red Sox pitcher and current ESPN analyst Curt Schilling checked in with the Mut & Merloni show Wednesday to offer his opinions on the state of the team. To hear the interview, go to the Mut & Merloni audio on demand page.

The big topic of discussion this week has been the struggles of John Lackey. Schilling had plenty to say about the former Angels hurler who has yet to live up to his big free agent contract in Boston.

“I don’t know that you’ve gotten much different than what was [in Anaheim],” Schilling said. “This was a guy who always pitched to contact, a guy who didn’t have — with maybe the exception of a year – was never a high strikeout guy, coming to the biggest and best and most potent offensive division in baseball.

“I know he’s someone who has always hated pitching in Fenway. He made multiple comments after multiple series — especially in the postseason — about pitching here. I was surprised to see him sign here, actually. I don’t know what the competitive money was, but I didn’t think that this was a place he wanted to pitch.

“Having said that, I think that there’s a lot of stuff going on off the field, as would there be with anybody whose wife is undergoing chemo and the cancer scare that his wife is. Once you start to enter that into the equation — and I know fans don’t want to hear that — I don’t discount that. I don’t discount the impact and the effect that that can have on someone.

“Where they’re at? Jeez, they don’t have options. You’re not going to send him down. You’re not going to release him. Can you put him in the bullpen? Will he go to the bullpen? There’s a lot of things. If you listen to the guys in that clubhouse talk, they swear by the guy, which, for me, is a huge indicator of what kind of player he is.

“My biggest challenge has been a lot of his postgame stuff has been, not lack of accountability, but I just feel like life would be a lot easier if he just sat down after these games and said, ‘You now what? I sucked.’ If he did the Josh Beckett, I think life would be a little bit easier for him. But you know what? They’re going to keep running him out there, and hopefully he gets the ship righted.”

Read the rest of this entry »

Bobby Jenks leaning toward embracing his set-up role with Daniel Bard in Red Sox pen.

FORT MYERS, Fla. — Change is never easy.

But Bobby Jenks has made a career out of it. The former fifth-round pick of the Anaheim Angels in 2000 came up through their system as a starter, cut from the same mold as Roger Clemens: big, strong and intimidating.

The new Red Sox, who will share the late innings with Daniel Bard behind Jonathan Papelbon, acknowledged Monday that he was a big fan of Clemens and Greg Maddux when he broke into baseball as a starter.

“When I was younger, I was a starting pitcher and I looked up to Roger Clemens a lot and I used to watch him and Greg Maddux a lot because I grew up a huge Braves fan,” Jenks said. “You’re either a Cubs fan with TBS and WGN so I had TBS and Greg Maddux and Roger Clemens were the two biggest guys that I watched.”

[AUDIO: Listen to Bobby Jenks talk about Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux and his right elbow.]

But one elbow surgery and rehab was all it took to change the course of his career.

Jenks ran into elbow problems in 2004 in the Angels system and was waived before being picked up by the White Sox in 2005.

“It was a combined decision in ’04 after I had my elbow surgery to try to keep less innings and less stress on the elbow so the year before, in talking with the Angels, I knew I might be going into the bullpen in that ’05 season with the Angels but I ended up getting picked up by the White Sox and it just worked out the same way,” Jenks added.

Jenks appeared in 32 regular season games for the 2005 White Sox before leading his team to a World Series title with two saves apiece against the Red Sox and Astros in the ALDS and World Series.

Last time the Red Sox had the No. 19 overall draft pick, they took Roger Clemens. (AP)

It was not long ago that teams signed free agents without regard for the draft pick they would have to sacrifice to do so. Clearly, that has changed.

Indeed, the pick that a team must sacrifice to sign a Type A free agent who rejects salary arbitration from his former club has become so significant that it reportedly became the subject of significant contention in the Yankees organization. Earlier this month, New York GM Brian Cashman said the Yankees — after being spurned by Cliff Lee — wouldn’t sign a Type A free agent because they were unwilling to sacrifice their first-round pick. But he was reportedly overruled at the ownership level, resulting in the decision to give up the No. 31 overall selection and sign Rafael Soriano as the most expensive setup man in history.

Just how valuable is the No. 31 overall pick? The answer varies significantly by year.

In 46 June drafts, just 15 players taken at the No. 31 spot have reached the majors. (For the complete list, click here.) Only two of them emerged as above-average players. One was Jarrod Washburn, who won 107 games after being taken by the Angels in 1995. The other? Greg Maddux, whose 355 career wins are the most by a right-hander whose career started after the World War…World War I, that is.

The Red Sox’ free-agent activity resulted in their losing their own first-round pick (No. 24 overall) while gaining two (Nos. 19 and 26). Under GM Theo Epstein, the Sox have used compensation draft picks to acquire a number of their key prospects. (For details, click here.)

But historically, what kind of players have been selected with the first-round picks gained and sacrificed by the Sox this winter? Here is a look at the history of the three first-round draft picks that were affected by the Red Sox’ free agent activity this offseason:

Read the rest of this entry »

Boston lawyer Harry Manion joined the Dennis & Callahan show Monday morning to talk about the Roger Clemens situation, as the former pitcher faces his arraignment on federal perjury charges Monday afternoon in Washington. To hear the interview, visit the Dennis & Callahan audio on demand page.

“I think he’s looking at jail,” Manion said. “I think he has a very significant chance of getting convicted here. If he gets convicted, [Judge Reggie] Walton is going to apply those sentencing guidelines to these serious felonies, especially obstruction, and I think he’s going to give him at least 12 months behind the wall.”

Manion said Clemens’ attorneys might be able to negate at least some the damage done by former trainer Brian McNamee and ex-teammate Jose Canseco, but there are other issues that will be more difficult to combat. Said Manion: ”The problem he really has is Andy Pettitte. Andy Pettitte and he disagree on a  material fact. Andy Pettitte testified that Roger Clemens told him that he was taking steroids. Roger’s defense to that is, ‘He misunderstood me.’ Well, after you hear from McNamee, after you hear from Canseco, and then you hear Andy Pettitte, who is his friend, who also ponied up and said, ‘I did it,’ who has a lot of credibility, it’s going to be very hard to challenge Pettitte.”

Then there is George Mitchell, who conducted baseball’s investigation into steroids and said that Clemens refused to participate. Said Manion: “Roger says, ‘I never knew I had an opportunity to talk to Mitchell.’ And Mitchell says, ‘That’s impossible. We did everything possible.’

“So, he’s set up a credibility confrontation with Canseco and McNamee — which is fine, that’s what trials are all about. Pettitte and Mitchell are really different cats. And then you have the whole, ‘Did he know that his wife was being injected by McNamee at the same time.’ This is a big, big problem for Roger.”

Manion said if he were Clemens’ lawyer instead of Rusty Hardin, he would not have continued to represent Clemens when the pitcher proved he couldn’t keep his mouth shut. “His client has done everything wrong here,” Manion said. “He wouldn’t be my client anymore the minute he went on ’60 Minutes’ and raised his hand in front of Congress, I would have said ‘Roger, you and I are no longer attorney-client. Best of luck to you. Stay in touch. See you around.’

“If he paid me three times my hourly [fee], I would not watch that train wreck happen on my watch. I could never live with myself. … ‘I’m not watching you go to jail and ruin your life in front of your family and the world with me being your lawyer. No way.’ ”

Manion said he wasn’t surprised Clemens hired a new attorney to help with the trial. “I think Rusty is tainted here by the advice he’s given,” Manion said. “I don’t think he should be in the first chair. I don’t even think he should be in the courtroom.”

A big question heading into the trial will be if Clemens will take the stand. Said Manion: “He has to. He’s already crossed the rubicon. He’s already said under oath, ‘Let me be clear.’ So, there is nothing worse he can do. He has to take the stand.”

Manion did leave open the chance that Clemens’ lawyers could try to talk their client out of testifying in the unlikely event that they feel they already have the case won after cross examination of prosecution witnesses, but, “I don’t see how Roger can ever get a not guilty or a hung jury here without testifying.”

According to a New York Daily News report, Clemens plans to take a private plane to South Carolina right after the arraignment to participate in a celebrity golf tournament. Manion said that could come back to haunt him if even one member of the jury remembers it. “He should be respectful and quiet, and it’s just not in him,” Manion said. “He’s going to go all [Rod Blagojevich] on us.”

Michael McCann (UVM)

Noted Sports Illustrated columnist and University of Vermont professor on sports law, Michael McCann called into the Dennis & Callahan show Tuesday to discuss the upcoming Roger Clemens perjury trial. Clemens had previously been offered a plea deal that had offered him the chance to get off from serving time in jail, but he refused to accept it.

“He’ll be offered [another plea deal] as soon as the government wants to do it, conceivably up until throughout the trial … I have a feeling the government, the further this gets along, the less willing they’ll be to do that and Clemens’ personality is one that we all agree does not lend itself to settling,” said McCann. “I think he wants to keep fighting this. He just believes what he’s doing is right and he could end up going to prison because of this.”

Below are highlights of the interview. To listen to the full interview, click on the Dennis & Callahan audio on demand page.

On what will be the biggest piece of evidence going into the Clemens trial:

I think it’s going to be [Andy] Pettitte’s testimony. I think [Brian] McNamee’s testimony will be attacked on a number of grounds by Clemens’ lawyers as unreliable, as based on being handled by somebody who isn’t trustworthy. Andy Pettitte won’t have any of that baggage. Andy Pettitte will be seen as credible; he has no reason to lie. Roger Clemens is going to have a tough time saying, if Pettitte gets up there and says in essence, Clemens told me he was using HGH, why would Pettitte be lying? I think that could be a real issue for Clemens.

On how the jury could believe that McNamee supplied HGH to Pettitte, Chuck Knoblauch and Debbie Clemens, but not Roger Clemens:

I don’t think it could [work], although his lawyers could say, in essence, Clemens just happens to be a coincidental actor here. Also, maybe McNamee used a variety of drugs, including vitamin B12 in addition to steroids and HGH, so I think Clemens is going to say, “You know, fine. Other people are using it, but that doesn’t mean beyond a reasonable doubt that I used it. And also, look at McNamee, is he a trustworthy guy? Is he reliable?”

[The fact that he allowed McNamee to inject his wife with HGH] is going to be an issue for Clemens to overcome. Clemens is going to say, ‘I don’t know what McNamee injected me with. He told me it was vitamin B12.” It’s worked so far for Barry Bonds.

Read the rest of this entry »