It's OK to panic.

Part of being a sports fan, isn't it? I'm not talking about being irrational. Nobody thinks the Red Sox are 0-3 and on their way to 68-94. 

But what we just saw over the last three days was a beatdown. A endless loop of "Ring of Fire." The kind of sweep that might lead one to wonder why everyone picked the Red Sox to win the World Series.

So, panic away, but I urge you to do so in moderation and with some legitimate cause for concern. 

No Jon Lester-bashing allowed, for example. We know what he is in April and what he is the rest of the year, and while it's tough to figure out why this is, you kind of have to live with it. And easy on the Daniel Bard worries. If his ERA is still in 54.00 in two weeks, question away. Come on, haven't we seen enough of Bard to at least give him a pass when he kicks a game away?

But hey, it's not only fans that panic. Look at Terry Francona. If, say a week ago, a member of the media had asked Francona if there was any scenario in the world that would lead to Carl Crawford hitting seventh in the lineup in 2011, I'm guessing the answer -- if there was an answer at all -- would be something different than two lousy games in April. 

Crawford had a couple of hits on Sunday so I guess it worked out, but it struck me as a staggering overreaction to seven at-bats. The smallest of small sample sizes. This is a guy who has played over 1,200 games, and until Sunday had been in the No. 7 spot exactly zero times. The explanation was that Crawford was "trying too hard," according to Francona. I'll be honest -- I'm not sure I'm buying that one. Would Francona move a pressing Kevin Youkilis down to seventh? How about an 0-for-7 Dustin Pedroia? Or Adrian Gonzalez? Nope, nada and nyet.

I'm on record as being down on the Crawford signing. Two games mean nothing, of course, I'd still think Crawford is a $70 million player being paid twice that much if he had hit for the cycle on both Friday and Saturday. The truth is this: In this lineup -- assuming Ellsbury is productive -- is it a huge reach to think that maybe the sixth spot in this lineup could be the right place for Crawford? He's the fifth- or sixth-best hitter on the team, isn't he? Is that worth $142 million to you?

But Crawford is going to be fine. An obvious overpay, and he'll never give you the offensive numbers to earn $20 million a year -- there is nothing even close in his history to suggest that -- but there is no chance he's going to be a bust. 

Can we really say the same about John Lackey?

Any currency Lackey might have still had with Sox fans after his career-worst 2010 season is gone. It's over. He's just another guy. No one cares that he once led the AL in ERA, or won a World Series in 2002 (2002? We might as well be talking about Old Hoss Radbourn).

Lackey is durable? Swell, all that has meant over the last 12 months is that he's guaranteed to show up to take his pounding every fifth day. Here are Lackey's numbers with the Red Sox: 14-12 with a 4.69 ERA. Lackey is the highest-paid pitcher in Red Sox history, and one year and one start into an $82 million contract he has been a poor man's Paul Byrd.

I understand that Lackey was closer to the Anaheim Lackey in the second half of last season (3.92 ERA, 1.25 WHIP), but knowing that probably didn't give you much comfort if you watched him allowed 10 hits and nine earned runs in 3 1/3 innings on Saturday night. 

A Rudy Stein line, and there's no evidence that Lackey is going to turn into Amanda Whurlitzer anytime soon. 

Do you realize Lackey gave up a double cycle on Saturday? Three singles, three doubles, two triples and two home runs. First time that's happened to a Red Sox pitcher in 37 years. But before you get too worried, don't forget that he lost 12 pounds in the offseason! (Lesson: Never put any stock into a spring training story, good or bad.)

John Lackey, making history. 

Give Paul Byrd Lackey this, at least. He tried to break out a new and improved version of the Postgame After a Crappy Outing Lackey on Saturday. Didn't throw anyone under the bus, didn't talk about how good is stuff was, didn't make a single excuse (which is frankly about as stunning than the double cycle). 

So while his pitching might still be a disaster, his explanation as to why is in the best shape of its career. 

Look, clearly we're all having a little fun with this panic stuff. This is a good team that ran into a loaded offense (P.S., this wasn't the Royals that swept the Sox) and got smacked around for 48 hours or so. It happens. The 1985-86 Celtics remain the best team in any sport I've seen in my lifetime, and they lost to the Dave Wohl-led Nets on opening night. There's a reason why you forgot that. And if the Red Sox win 11-of-14 games, no one is going to remember Ian Kinsler or Nelson Cruz or George W. Bush or even the blonde girl who kept popping in and out on the upper left half of the screen on NESN Sunday (one of the most pathetic Google searches of my life).

I still think this is a playoff team, and three games in Texas doesn't change that.

But there were questions about this team weeks ago, and there still are questions today. The road to .500 has replaced the march to 100, at least for now.

Panic is a huge reach today, but it's your right as a sports fan.

But when it comes to Carl Crawford and John Lackey, it's more than fair to ask if this was money wisely spent.