In a recent interview in a Japanese magazine, Red Sox pitcher Daisuke Matsuzaka admitted to hiding a leg injury from the Red Sox prior to last year's World Baseball Classic. That leg injury ended up being responsible for changing Matsuzaka's mechanics and essentially costing him most of last season.

While the idea that a pitcher they have made a huge financial investment in hid a significant injury is sure to bristle the Sox brass, I doubt this new revelation will damage the relationship between the front office and their Japanese import. That's because their relationship hit a low point last summer, when Daisuke complained about the Sox, while the Sox questioned Daisuke's work ethic. Once the relationship bottomed out, it seemed to then get better, with Daisuke apologizing for his remarks and then adopting the Sox training regime. When he returned at the end of the season, he was the best Daisuke Sox fans have seen.

And that's a point that gets overlooked as we prepare for the 2010 season. Ten months from now, we might look back and say the most important acquisition for the 2010 Red Sox was the addition of . . . Daisuke Matsuzaka.

During his first two full seasons, Matsuzaka was good, but he was never the dominant pitcher Sox fans expected him to be. He had great stuff, but he nibbled too much around the corners, walked to many hitters, and always seemed to have the one-inning implosion. Then, after his terrible start to last season and his lost summer, Daisuke and the Sox finally seemed to get on the same page. And when he returned, he dominated major league hitters like never before. He was finally the Daisuke Matsuzaka Sox fans expected when we signed him.

And then the Sox got swept out of the playoffs. Season over.

As Sox fans reflect on last season, it is hard to see through the glare of the team's disappointing playoff performance, offensive ineptitude, and Daisuke's own injury-plagued season to remember just how good he was down the stretch.

Should Daisuke be able to carry that performance over to the 2010 season, the Sox will have a rotation for the ages.

Dan:

A year ago, Red Sox fans were anxiously awaiting word on whether Jim Rice would FINALLY be elected to the Hall of Fame. Thankfully, he was. Now, we wait for word on the newly elected members of the Hall. To me, there are three clear-cut choices for Cooperstown, whether or not the baseball writers in all their wisdom choose to see it that way. They are:

Jack Morris - With his devastating fork ball and Hall-of-Fame porn mustache, Morris was a dominant pitcher throughout the 80s and early 90s. He was THE MAN on World Series championship teams in Detroit, Minnesota and Toronto. (Not to mention he pitched what is arguably the greatest World Series game ever - Game 7, Minnesota-Atlanta.) He may not have the padded stats that mindless Hall voters have think for them, but anyone who followed baseball during that time knows Morris was consistently great and one of the very best pitchers of his day.

Bert Blyleven - Disregarding for a moment what I just said about mindless stats, let me say the most compelling case for Blyleven's induction is one simple stat: The fifth most strikeouts . . . ever. Blyleven spent his career bouncing between a who's who of the game's worst teams . . . teams that made today's Royals look like the Anaheim Angels. And, for them, Blyleven was great. He didn't get a ton of wins, and because of that suffered when it came to Cy Young time, but he was great. Understand, strikeouts are not some meaningless stat. Simply, each time a guy strikes out against you, your stuff was too good for that major league hitter. It's not like wins, where you can muddle by with mediocrity if you are on a good team. Because of a long career on several good teams, Don Sutton got wins and is in the Hall of Fame . . . somehow. He wasn't half the pitcher Blyleven was.

Roberto Alomar - Arguably the greatest second-baseman to ever play the game. During the 90s, if a team wanted to win, they went out and got Alomar. The Blue Jays, the Orioles, the Indians, all were elite teams in large part because of Alomar. Offensively, for a second-baseman, he was great. Defensively, for a second-baseman, he was incredible. His election should be a slam dunk.

Dan:

I just don't know how to feel about this.

The Sox have signed a new third baseman, Adrian Beltre. This is a player who I stated I hoped the Sox stayed far away from in a blog entry a few weeks ago. Beltre is a player who has been a colossal underachiever his entire career. (If you think his fluke 2004 season wasn't PED-fueled, I have a bridge I want to sell you.) On top of that - and most disturbing - signing him signals that the Red Sox truly are out of the running for Adrian Gonzalez.

This is the latest blow in an offseason that has left me feeling sick about the Red Sox 2010 chances -- following the signing of Fluko Scutaro, losing Bay and replacing him with Mike "The K" Cameron.

However, maybe not all is lost . . .

The saving grace in the Beltre signing is the contract. I am shocked at how reasonable it is. A mere $9 million, followed by a player option of $5 million in 2011 and a $1 million buyout.

Wow.

I thought signing Beltre would take much more money and a commitment of several years. I'm not a fan of Beltre, but for $9 million for what essentially is a one-year deal, I can live with it. In fact, I almost like it.

Beltre must have had almost no suitors for him to accept this deal, which is nowhere near what Scott Boras was seeking for him. He must be hoping to play well this year, in a high-profile market, and cash in next off-season. Make no mistake: There is NO WAY Beltre accepts just $5 million to come back next year. Only way he does is if he has a terrible year, and, with that money, the Sox will likely be looking to eat his contract and replace him anyway should that happen.

Buried deep in the order, and playing in Fenway Park, Beltre may even end up being a huge steal, as he has all the motivation in the world to produce for a contract, has little offensive expectations, and moves from large Safeco Field to Fenway, where he can use the wall to pad his stats.

The more I think about it, the more I kind of like this deal. This offseason certainly hasn't gone how I wanted it to go. In fact, it has pretty much gone the opposite direction. But who knows? This team might still be pretty decent next year.

Of course, if they aren't, I'll say I told you so.

Dan:

Maybe it will be okay. Maybe . . .

From the start of this offseason, I've been preaching that the Sox needed offense. That they needed to bring back Jason Bay AND trade for Adrian Gonzalez.

Instead, they've swapped a proven defensive stud in Alex Gonzalez for Marco Scutaro - a career mediocre player who had a "breakout" year last year as he approached his mid-30s (fluke anyone?); they've lost Jason Bay; Adrian Gonzalez has been taken off the market; and they've added the Mike "The Human Strikeout Machine" Cameron.

Sure, they've added an ace pitcher in John Lackey. But can anyone who endured the frustration of last year's offensive woes really feel good about this team as it stands right now?

As much as I've felt sick about the direction this team's offense has been headed this offseason, I've been trying to convince myself otherwise. As it stands now, next year's Opening Day lineup could look something like this:

1. Jacoby Ellsbury
2. Dustin Pedroia
3. Victor Martinez
4. David Ortiz
5. Kevin Youkilus
6. J.D. Drew
7. Mike Lowell
8. Marco Scutaro
9. Mike Cameron

Forgetting for a moment about last year, that lineup doesn't look so bad, even without Jason Bay. Sure, there are major question marks. David Ortiz almost certainly looks to be on the decline. Same can be said for Mike Lowell as he looks like he is physically breaking down. Of course, you can't talk about physical breakdowns without mentioning J.D. Drew. Still, even with those question marks, it is a solid lineup. And one that I'd put up against almost team not named "the Yankees."

Given that, it almost makes you wonder: What really happened to that offense last year even when they had Jason Bay in the middle of it? It should have been so much better. Maybe it was just an anomoly. Maybe 9 times out of 10 it would have performed much better.

Absent of the Sox landing Adrian Gonzalez, it seems the Sox brass are thinking the same thing. That, most likely, that offense will be more potent in 2010. It had to be a fluke, right?

I hope so. But I'd prefer to add an Adrian Gonzalez just to be safe.

Dan:

In case you missed it this weekend, the Globe's Nick Cafardo continued his assault on intelligent sports journalism, with a piece proclaiming Boston's current starting rotation as a dream rotation, and how foolish it would be to break it up and trade Clay Buchholz for Adrian Gonzalez.

Yes, foolish.

The article comes on the heels of Cafardo's recent piece in which he makes Jacoby Ellsbury sound like the second-coming of Willie Mays and Adrian Gonzalez the second-coming of Steve Balboni.

The Ellsbury article was bad enough, as I've already blogged about. But the Buchholz piece takes it to another level. Buchholz pitched well last year, and he has a ton of potential. And having him as your Number Five starter certainly gives you a deep rotation -- not a dream rotation, but a deep rotation.

You see, Buchholz is a good, young pitcher. But although he has pitched well early in his career, he is still relatively unproven. Casey Fossum also pitched some good games early in his career. Paxton Crawford, anyone? I certainly think Buchholz is better than those two, but the logic behind not trading Buchholz for Gonzalez doesn't make sense. It remind me of when some Celtics fans didn't want to deal Al Jefferson for Kevin Garnett. Thankfully, the C's made the deal, and how did that turn out?

Hindsight is 20-20, but baseball deals are made given what he know in the here and now. And, right now, we know Buchholz is very good, but still unproven. And we know that the sum total of what Adrian Gonzalez brings to a team is worth a lot more than what Buchholz brings to a team.

Sure, pitching is important, and shouldn't be taken for granted. But, even without Buchholz, the Sox still have a deep and formidable rotation when compared with the rest of baseball. Their offense? Not nearly as intimidating.

I know the saying of how pitching wins championships. Pitching certainly does help. But remember those pitching-rich Atlanta Braves teams that won 14-straight division titles? How many World Series rings did they win?

Dan:

Sometimes you have to wonder what kind of intelligence test you have to flunk to be a professional sports writer. For example, check out today's piece at www.Boston.com. by Nick Cafardo.

In the article, Cafardo makes a ridiculous and terrible arguement for keeping Jacoby Ellsbury instead of trading him for Adrian Gonzalez. He describes Gonzalez as the last piece to the team's offensive puzzle, but then goes on to describe Ellsbury like he is the second-coming of Willie Mays. Cafardo makes it sound like we're talking about trading a guy like Gonzalez to get a guy like Ellsbury.

Ellsbury is an immensely likeable player -- both as a person and on the field. He's exciting to watch. But, let's not fool ourselves, the benefits he brings to a team are nowhere near the benefits an Adrian Gonzalez brings to a team.

Speedy leadoff hitters are great to have. But not absolutely necessary. Witness the Red Sox championship teams of 2004 and 2007. Last year's champion Yankees featured Derek Jeter as their leadoff hitter. The Red Sox featured some great teams when Wade Boggs was their leadoff hitter. So let's not overvalue how crucial Ellsbury is to this team.

Cafardo goes on to make the amateur talk-radio yahoo arguement that instead of sending off Ellsbury, the Sox should merely include one or two more prospects. That's all fine . . . if that's what the Padres want. I'm sure Theo is in no hurry to deal both Buchholz and Ellsbury to anyone. And is probably trying to negotiate a lesser deal. But, if the Padres won't budge on prospects instead of Ellsbury, the Sox have a decision to make.

And, if they must deal Ellsbury, then they should do it.

Dan:

Reports are the Padres are seeking both Jacoby Ellsbury and Clay Buchholz from the Red Sox for Adrian Gonzalez. The inclusion of both Ellsbury and Buchholz in a deal is sure to make many Sox fans cringe, but it's a deal worth doing.

Often in baseball it does seem a team can get something for nothing, especially when one rich team can acquire a star player from a poor team for little more than cash. It is only money, after all. However, in the real world, to get something of real value, you have to give up something of real value. And that's the situation the Sox are in chasing Adrian Gonzalez.

The past three season, Sox fans have enjoyed watching Ellsbury -- from his amazing speed on the basepaths to his fearless, wall-crashing defense. He's an excellent ballplayer, and may someday be a great leadoff hitter. But Ellsbury will never give a team as much as Adrian Gonzalez does. And, although it hurts to give him and Buchholz up, it's worth it.

If the deal does happen, the question is what will Boston's outfield look like? In all likelihood, newly-acquired Mike Cameron would move into centerfield. That would open up leftfield for a free-agent addition like Jason Bay or Matt Holliday, although at this time both look unlikely. Perhaps more likely would be the Sox sticking with Jeremy Hermidia in leftfield, possibly platooning him with another addition.

Hermidia is a very interesting player. He came up to the majors in Florida about four seasons ago with a ton of hype. Unfortunately, he has never lived up to that hype. The thing is, he's still only 25. He's still two years away from the magic age of 27 -- the well-documented age at which many major league ballplayers breakout. Hermidia is much too young and talented to be written off -- even though many people already have. Maybe he'll never be that superstar. But it's still just as likely that we may someday look back and say Theo got the steal of this offseason.

Dan:

Reports are that the top free-agent pitcher on the market -- and longtime Sox nemesis -- John Lackey took a physical with the Red Sox this morning, which could be a precursor to a deal.

If true, it's an interesting move, and honestly one that I didn't see coming. Given the depth of the Sox rotation, I didn't believe they'd spend money on a big free agent pitcher this offseason, preferring instead to tweak their offense and save money for next offseason, when the team has some big decisions to make.

Signing Lackey will give the Sox an amazing starting rotation, with the front four being Beckett, Lackey, Lester and Matsuzaka -- who, if he is anything like how he finished this past season, could next year be that amazing pitcher we've all been waiting for.

But this move could also set off an interesting chain of events. One of the most interesting ideas I've heard is that bringing in Lackey could give the Sox the flexibility to move Clay Bucholz, thereby possibly making a deal possible with San Diego for Adrian Gonzalez.

Another thing is what will now happen with Roy Halliday. Toronto NEEDS to move him this offseason. With the Sox out of the running, does that mean Halliday is headed to the Bronx, or - if they lose Lackey - will the Angels make an aggressive push to land him? Should be interesting . . .