Red Sox Radio Host Drops Absurd Roman Anthony-Marcelo Mayer Take

Sometimes, it only takes one game's worth of regular-season baseball to make Boston Red Sox debates spiral out of control.

It's a big season for 23-year-old infielder Marcelo Mayer, and the youngster got off to a great start with a 2-for-2 performance off the bench in the Red Sox's season opener on Thursday. He didn't start against left-handed Cincinnati Reds starter Andrew Abbott, but made a major impact against two right-handed relievers.

Plenty of Red Sox pundits and fans thought Mayer should have been in the starting lineup because of the symbolism of the season opener. But Mike Felger of NBC Sports Boston took the take much, much farther.

If you like our content, choose Sports Illustrated as a preferred source on Google.

Felger's Marcelo Mayer take flies off the handle

First, Felger urged the Red Sox to get Mayer into the lineup against left-handed starters in due time, saying "he's too good" to be on the bench.

"I know enough to know when a kid can play," Felger said. "The kid can flat-out play. It's kind of obvious. And so yeah, he hasn't hit lefties yet. He just started. He will hit lefties in time. He will field the shortstop position at an elite level in time."

But in typical Boston sports radio fashion, Felger quickly pivoted the take to something much more ludicrous and tough to stomach. Mayer, he claimed, is goint to be a better player for the Red Sox than Roman Anthony.

"Marcelo Mayer's better than Roman Anthony," Felger insisted. "Mark the tape. I don't know if we'll get the final analysis this year or next year, but within the next three years, you will all agree: Marcelo Mayer is the superior player."

Anthony, of course, is already considered a top-50 player in baseball, perhaps even top-25. He's younger than Mayer and has proven himself far more in the majors, including a 3-for-3 performance in a left-on-left situation in that same game against the All-Star Abbott.

Should we give Felger the benefit of the doubt and assume he doesn't earnestly believe his take and is just trying to rile up gullible fools (like this writer)? Or do we instead need to fund a crash course to make sure our radio hosts have a lick of baseball knowledge?