In the place of Lackey and Matsuzaka, the Sox now have a cast of fill-ins that includes John Maine, Carlos Silva, Brandon Duckworth and Vicente Padilla.
Questions, questions, questions.
A sizable mound of questions.
And so for now, along with their dignity and credibility, here is what Red Sox starters sacrificed last season, all as the club continued to pay the whopping $300 million (and then some) invested in Beckett, Lackey, Lester, Buchholz and Matsuzaka: their standing in the game’s hierarchy. The Angels (Jered Weaver), Yankees (C.C. Sabathia) and Tigers (Justin Verlander) all have a better ace than the Red Sox, assuming the Red Sox have a true ace anymore at all.
In the AL last season, there were five pitchers who won 15 games and had an ERA under 3.00, and none of them pitched for the Red Sox. Given the money the Sox have poured into their rotation in recent years, that is not a good sign.
Let’s not forget: for the better part of the last 25 years, the Red Sox have had one of the true aces in baseball. Roger Clemens begot Pedro Martinez, who begot Curt Schilling, who begot Beckett. But the Beckett of today is not the man of 2007. Lester took a step back last year and similarly looks more like a No. 2 starter. And before anyone suggests the Sox have a depth of No. 2s, the question of durability significantly alters that argument, too?
Know how many times Beckett has made at least 30 starts in consecutive seasons? Once - and not since 2007. (He made precisely 30 last year.) Matsuzaka only did it once (in 2007). Even Lackey only has started at least 30 games once in the last four seasons. Buchholz failed to start 30 games in 2010, let alone last year.
Only Lester has started 30 or more games (actually 31 or more) with any regularity, having started at least that number in each of the last four years.
