Dave D’Onofrio of the Concord Monitor believes the Yankees were demonstrably better than the Red Sox this season (ignore the run differential).  To close that gap, he argues the Red Sox should trade Josh Beckett.  As is customary for such blanket assertions, he leaves the salient questions unanswered, to whom and for what in return?

Though he butchers the statistical justifications for it, D’Onofrio says Beckett’s reputation is greater than his production.  He is perceived as an ace and among the top pitchers in the game.  In reality, he’s been merely a decent starter.  His big game reputation has been sullied the past two seasons.

Why is not living up to an artificial perception a knock?

Beckett is streaky.  He’ll have a couple weeks where he’s unhittable then get shelled the next two starts.  Some of the shelling comes while pitching hurt.  He averages out to a good starter, slightly, though not obscenely, below the Sabathia-Lee level of late.

He was pulled before the 5th inning once all season.  The only time he didn’t throw at least 93 pitches was a rain-shortened game in September the Red Sox won 9-1.  He had 20 out of 32 quality starts.  Sabathia had 21 in 34 starts.  Not bad for $11 million in the AL East.

Beckett was bad in the 2008 playoffs.  It wasn’t a mysterious disappearance of clutchitude.  He was seriously injured.

What would Josh Beckett command on the trade market that would be better than Josh Beckett?  Do the Mets throw Wright or Reyes into a deal?  Unlikely.  But, even then, you plug one hole by creating another.  There’s no rational offer from a team for Beckett that would make the Red Sox substantially better.

Beckett may be overrated by the media.  That’s irrelevant.  He may not be an ace.  The Red Sox are not paying him like one.  Beckett’s productive.  He has a sensible contract.  If you’re trying to contend (which presumably is the goal of catching up with the Yankees), there’s no reason to trade him.