Should have kept Smoltz

John Smoltz looked good in his Cardinals debut, and Brad Penny is getting lit up like a Christmas tree, and will be skipped in the rotation, at least once. I questioned whether this was the right decision at the time because I didn't like the alternatives.

Now Smoltz is on the Cardinals, and he pitched very well, striking out 9 batters, including 7 in-a-row in his St. Louis debut. Is his remarkable 'resurgence' a factor of pitching against a weak Padres team (11th in the NL in scoring on the road), or was he really a better pitcher this season than his stats showed?

Smoltz departure didn't exactly generate tears in Beantown. To the contrary, I think most fans wanted him gone. He had not done what John Smoltz is supposed to do: dominate the opposition, or at minimum, keep the Sox in the game.

But as I wrote previously, his periphiral numbers (Ks, BBs, HRs) were in line with his fine 2007 season, except for greater tendency to give up the long ball, but that had stopped in his last few starts with Boston. Erik Manning at Fangraphs thinks Smoltz is far from done.

The Red Sox should have kept Smoltz, and not just because of this gem against San Diego. They should have kept him because, even if he's old, he had pitched well last season and his results were very likely to change for the better. And without great alternatives (one-pitch Penny, a 23-year-old with only indepent league Japanese experience, and a host of other young arms), there was no reason to terminate the relationship so quickly. If the Sox miss the playoffs by a game or two, this is a decision that could haunt Theo & Co.