| projo.com | The Providence Journal |

	April 24, 2001

Now before the court: Grebeck v Merloni.

Chris Stynes is about to come off the disabled list, and the accepted wisdom is that one of them -- Craig Grebeck or Lou Merloni -- will have to be jettisoned to make room on the roster. And the debate rages, even here: Whom should the Red Sox keep? Which player has skills the team needs most? Grebeck's a better fielder, but Merloni's a better hitter. Merloni has options and can be sent to the minors, but Grebeck would refuse an assignment to Pawtucket and thus be lost forever. What to do, what to do?

Well, excuse me, but why is that the only choice? Doesn't it strike you there's another player on the team, another infielder, with less importance than either Grebeck or Merloni? This player doesn't have Merloni's offensive skills -- he barely has Grebeck's -- and he doesn't have Grebeck's defensive value, at least not at shortstop. Why is this player (seemingly) safe, while the other two wait for the sword to fall?

I know the answer, and you do, too. There are 6.25 million reasons why Mike Lansing is apparently staying and either Grebeck or Meloni is apparently going.

And it infuriates me.

The Red Sox are about to weaken themselves by choice -- by choice -- for financial rather than competitive reasons, during a season in which they've clearly thrown monetary caution to the wind. Lansing can't do much of anything but he has a big contract, so he's not going anywhere. And a roster spot is wasted. Absolutely wasted.

The Sox set this ridiculous precedent with Jeff Frye, keeping him around in 1999 and 2000 because (and only because) he was under contract. I suppose they can make the case their "patience" paid off when they were able to include him in a deal for Rolando Arrojo. Last July's trade with Colorado hasn't proved to be much of an earth-shaker, but the fact is the only player currently worth anything in the deal -- Arrojo -- is now in a Boston uniform. (And ridding themselves of Brian Rose and John Wasdin was addition by subtraction for the Sox.) However, the price tag for Arrojo wasn't so much the talent surrendered but the willingness to take on Lansing and his bloated contract.

So the Sox did it. It didn't work out quite as they'd hoped, since Arrojo isn't the No. 2 starter they were looking for. But neither was it a disaster, since he's a useful bullpen arm.

Is a useful bullpen arm worth a $6.25 million appendage eating up a roster spot?

The team won't look at it that way, of course. The Sox aren't even pretending to seek value for their money; they're keeping Lansing only because he's under contract. Strictly monetary.

Okay, fine. Let's look at it in strictly monetary terms.

Lansing is owed this money no matter what, right? If he plays every game, if he plays no games, if he plays anything in between, the Sox have to pay him. So the real cost here is what they'd have to pay Grebeck or Merloni if they keep either one instead of Lansing.

Grebeck is being paid $700,000. I don't have Merloni's salary (he wasn't on the Opening Day roster and AP only lists salaries of players with the team when the season begins) but, considering Trot Nixon is being paid $390,000, I would estimate it at between $250,000 and $300,000. If the Sox cut Lansing loose, someone will pick him up. Whoever does will be responsible for paying him the major-league minimum -- $200,000 -- while the Sox pony up the rest.

These numbers have to be pro-rated, of course, to account for the weeks already past, but the basic cost is this: Approximately $500,000 if they keep Grebeck instead of Lansing, and approximately $50,000 to $100,000 if they keep Merloni instead of Lansing.

That is chump change. Absolute chump change, when you consider their total payroll at the start of the season was $109,558,908.

So there's really no excuse for it. Merloni and Grebeck form a workable offensive/defensive platoon at shortstop. Both are natural utilitymen, so either could easily slide to the bench when Nomar Garciaparra returns.

And they do something that helps the team. Merloni hits the ball, and Grebeck catches it. Lansing doesn't do either. Or, to be fair, he doesn't catch the ball as well as Grebeck (at shortstop) or hit it as well as Merloni.

I realize I'm frothing at the mouth, but here's why. I've been rereading Red Sox Century recently and the authors note that, throughout history, the Red Sox of Thomas A. Yawkey -- or the Red Sox of the Yawkey Tradition, which is how they've billed themselves in the 25 years since his death -- have never made the maximum effort to win. They've always come up a player or two short, sometimes by chance but many times by choice. Many times they'd delude themselves into thinking that what they had on hand was sufficient. We've seen it in our lifetime. Tim McCarver's a pain; let's get rid of him and keep Bob Montgomery. Who needs Bernie Carbo? We have Garry Hancock! What would we do with Willie McGee and Harold Baines? And the team falls agonizingly short time after time, often because key at-bats in crucial games are being taken by players like Bob Bailey and Damon Buford.

This -- keeping Lansing over one of two players who can actually contribute (a little) to the winning of games -- is in that tradition. It scares me. And it angers me. And it angers me even more that we, as fans, have come to accept it, that we're actually debating the merits of Grebeck vs. Merloni while accepting the fact that Lansing isn't going anywhere.

I'd love to be pleasantly surprised sometime today or tomorrow and hear that the Sox have placed Mike Lansing on waivers. It would show that the Sox are truly serious about trying to win. To be, as the authors point out, a championship team, rather than the championship-caliber team the Sox put forth in their mission statement.

newspaper ads

shop & subscribe