You could make an argument that the Earth is flat.

"The Red Sox will be just fine." I happen to agree with Matt Waxman.

The easiest way to support this proposition is to list the Red Sox roster: Manny, Ortiz, Varitek, Beckett, Foulke, etc. Further, consider their enormous payroll and revenue streams.

The worst way to support this proposition is with pointless anti-Yankee "arguments":

"Conversely, you could make an argument that the Yankees have but two players (Robinson Cano and Chien-Ming Wang) on their 25-man roster whose best years are ahead of them."

Well, sure. You could make that argument.

You could also make the argument that a dozen players on the Yankees 25-man roster will have their best season ever.

(Robinson Cano, Chien-Ming Wang, Johnny Damon, Mike Mussina, Derek Jeter, Andy Phillips, Johnny Damon, Alex Rodriguez, Shawn Chacon, Aaron Small, Bubba Crosby.)

This scenario is not likely. Those Everybody Having Career Year seasons only happen once every 1998. But I could make the argument.

In fact, I could make the argument that Robinson Cano and Chien-Ming Wang have peaked and Jason Giambi will win the AL MVP, leading the Yankees to the playoffs, and saving the skins of all these young, athletic, fresh whippersnappers.


"Conversely, the Yankees average age keeps going up like George Steinbrenner's blood pressure every year his team doesn't win the World Series."

Conversely to the converse, the Yankees average age went down this off-season.

The age of the remaining individual players has gone up from last year. Every player on every baseball team has aged exactly one year since last year.

But the overall age of (John Flaherty) the (Mike Stanton) Yankees (Kevin Brown) has (Tom Gordon) gone (Tony Womack) down.


"New York's rotation is a strained back and a pulled oblique away from being in shambles."

This is obviously true.

But get a list of all 30 major league teams. Now look at their rosters. Now take away their top two starters due to injury.

Is that rotation now in shambles? Yup.


"Let us not forget that if Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke give the team anything in 2006, that'll be an improvement over their contributions to last year's team, which still made the playoffs."

Let us not forget that Curt Schilling and Keith Foulke are a strained back and a pulled oblique away from giving the team nothing in 2006.

What good is an analysis if it merely consists of best-of scenarios for one team and worst-of scenarios for the other team?

Because, you know what, Matt Waxman? The Red Sox will probably be just fine in 2006. but so will the Yankees.


Rant Number Two

Why does every conversation about the Red Sox have to include a conversation about the Yankees?

The Red Sox will play the Yankees 19 times in 2006 and they'll probably win 9 or 10 of them, like they usually do.

Apart from these 19 games, how would a Yankee collapse help the Red Sox? If the Yankees really collapsed, then somebody is beating them. That somebody could be the Blue Jays or the Orioles. If Unit and Mussina go on the DL, what's stopping the Blue Jays from winning the AL East? Or at least from challenging the Red Sox in the AL East?

The Jays added Ryan and Glaus, they'll get contributions from Halladay, and Schilling and Beckett might pull their obliques. There ya go! That was easy!

The Red Sox will be good not because of who they lost, but because of who they kept. The Red Sox will be good if they stay healthy, not if the Yankees get hurt.