Maybe I'm just nuts?

Maybe being displaced to a friend's apartment for a week while my place was without power caused a screw to come loose?

Either way, I don't think the Red Sox should be too enthusiastic about moving John Lackey, despite a report that the Los Angeles Angels are interested..

The Red Sox have two years and $30.5 million left on Lackey's deal. If they trade him they would in all likelihood be making the ultimate "sell low" deal.

The return on Lackey will be minimal, the Red Sox will probably have to eat some of the remaining salary, and they've already sunk $50 million into Lackey and gotten almost nothing in return.

In other words, the Red Sox won't ever recoup any true value on the Lackey deal. The best-case trade scenario has Lackey yielding nothing more than a very low-ceiling minor league prospect.

Instead, the Red Sox could consider holding onto Lackey and hoping that his elbow issues were a major contributing factor to his terrible performance in 2011. Now with that issue fixed by Tommy John surgery, and with plenty of time to rehabilitate, Lackey might just bear some resemblance to the pitcher the Red Sox actually thought they were getting when they signed him to a five-year deal worth $82.5 million back on Dec. 14, 2009.

That Lackey consistently kept his earned run average under 4.00. He gutted out starts, came up big when his team needed him, and was generally considered a solid addition to any major league starting rotation.

Lackey's 2010 season, which was his first in Boston, was a tale of two halves. Lackey's first half was terrible. One could possibly chalk that up to a period of adjusting to a new team, home ballpark, division residence and pitching coach.

Once Lackey settled in, he actually pitched decently. Lackey's second half in 2010 was not that bad. He was 5-6 with a 3.97 ERA and 1.216 WHIP ratio. Both those numbers are in line with his career averages. Lackey was also a workhorse in 2010, starting 33 games and pitching 215 innings.

The 2011 season was a disaster, though. Lackey's numbers were historically bad. He led the American League in earned runs allowed and hit batters. He finished 12-2 with a 6.41 ERA, more than two full runs higher than his career ERA.

Less than one month after the 2011 season ended in disastrous fashion for the Red Sox, news broke that Lackey would need Tommy John surgery, and he missed all of the 2012 season.

Lackey had the surgery and has had plenty of time to rehabilitate. By the time he makes his first start in 2013 he will be well more than one year removed from the procedure.

If the Red Sox are going to trade Lackey and presumably receive pennies on the dollar in value, they should be certain he can't return to form. The Red Sox don't have a surplus of great options when it comes to starting pitchers.

Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz will probably anchor the staff rotation next season. The remaining spots in the rotation will be filled by some mix of Lackey (if he's still there), Felix Doubront, Franklin Morales, and players that the Red Sox acquire via either trade or the free agent market.

So why not keep Lackey? He can't be much worse than he was in 2011. The odds are that his injured elbow did impact his performance that year. The team has already sunk a ton of money into him. Why not wait and see the results of the surgery?

If a team approaches the Red Sox with a legitimate offer to take Lackey off their hands in which they receive some decent major league talent then trading Lackey could make sense.

That probably won't happen.

Teams will be looking to buy low here. They know Lackey's reputation in Boston is in the mud. They know he's been a major disappointment as a member of the Red Sox. They also know he was a decent starter in the second half of 2010, they know he is competitive and will want to prove his doubters wrong in 2013, and they know the Red Sox might be able to be coerced into making a deal in which a team has to give up very little to acquire Lackey.

The Red Sox upper management should know all of these things as well.

Trade John Lackey? Sure, if the return is solid. But don't trade John Lackey just to simply rid the team of him. He might come in handy next season and in 2014.