Maybe not as great as Thome's 600th, but just as under appreciated.

Congrats.

Is he the worst pitcher to ever win 200?

Is he the worst pitcher to ever win 200?

Nah, he's at least better than the lesser Niekro.

And yay Timmy. Though obviously, tonight's game couldn't have been a big game if he got the victory in it.

He is far from the worse. Even though he's got a higher ERA than Earl Whitehill, he's at least got an ERA+ over 100, which can't be said about Whitehill, Phil's brother, and Lew Burdette. He's got a higher baseball-reference WAR than all three of them as well. Even though he's not a Hall of Famer, he is by no means the worst 200-game winner.

Congrats on 200 wins, Tim!

"Maybe not as great as Thome's 600th, but just as under appreciated."

I don't think you needed the word "maybe" there.

Maybe not as great as Thome's 600th, but just as under appreciated.


I don't k now about this. People view him as a generic, average-ish starter that's been around a long time. That's exactly what he is.

About f*cking time. It only cost the Sox 6 or 7 losses to try to get there. Now please retire.

And enough pants pissing from the true believers, it's getting ridiculous. Sure, they've had a rough patch, but too many good players not to win a few game down the stretch.

And enough pants pissing from the true believers, it's getting ridiculous. Sure, they've had a rough patch, but too many good players not to win a few game down the stretch.

Spoken bravely, after a win.

And congrats to Earth's biggest Timmy Wake fanatic, karlmagnus!

The Red Sox ain't home yet, not by a long shot.
The rotation is a bad joke.

About f*cking time. It only cost the Sox 6 or 7 losses to try to get there. Now please retire.

You do know, it's really not that hard to look this #### up. Since winning 199, he's had one miserable start, two good ones, and four meh ones. The team has gone 3-5 in those 8 starts, and the bullpen blew an 8-5 lead in one of the others.

For Christ's sake we already have Teddy to fill the irrational Wake hater role here, we don't need a Down Under version for some kind of global balance.

Nah, he's at least better than the lesser Niekro.

Yes, but Joe Niekro has him on clutchitude: zero runs allowed in 20 postseason innings, plus zero earned runs (one unearned) in a Game 163.

Are you ####### kidding me, #7? Who the #### else is going to pitch? It's not like the Sox have a healthy pitching staff and can afford to keep Wake as a long man, never mind that this is a guy who's been a part of the team for over a decade and a half. Way to have some ####### perspective.

Seriously, go #### yourself, cowfelcher.


edit: Jordan is Aussie? My apologies for the above. I should have said sheepfelcher.

Spoken bravely, after a win

Oh Darren, you are so wrong here. I am one of the few who have NOT wavered at all in the belief that this team will make the playoffs. Please direct your mild snark towards Jose and others.

#10, Teddy, I see you are still working that reverse psychology angle.

I don't hate Wake, but feel compelled to point out that he's overrated and has consistently sucked when it counts most for the Sox. Overall, he's below average, imo.

He's a good man. Its an athletic shortcoming, not a moral flaw.

Barring a plane crash, there is no conceivable way the Red Sox don't make the playoffs. I say this as someone who loathes the Socks more than any team in sports.

#13, I don't even know what a cowfelcher or sheepfelcher is..however if you are such an expert, please feel free to post your own experience on youtube.

#11, yes I was lazy, I apologise for that. The quest for 200 seemed to fail at the most inopportune times.

However, and I make 2 points, there is no need to get nasty with infantile responses as contained in #13 and to reiterate, if you go back through the numerous discussions regarding the Sox chances of making the playoffs, I have not wavered in my belief that this team will qualify for the postseason.

I don't hate Wake, but feel compelled to point out that he's overrated and has consistently sucked when it counts most for the Sox.

If you insist, though I'm encouraged to see that you've conceded the "irrational" part of the description. Baby steps.

However, and I make 2 points, there is no need to get nasty with infantile responses as contained in #13

LOL

Suck my ####, Jordan. You don't deserve a better response. Especially given you didn't even answer the point I made. Who else do you want to pitch? The sheep you just raped?

Hilarious how every time the Sox win one out of 4, or five or six games...people come out of the woodworks to say "See! See!" and they still have given up fewer than 6 runs twice in the last 11, and are 3-6 in their last 9 series and haven't won two in a row since Aug. 27th. Aug. 27th! But yes...they're a mortal lock.

scott - ease the #### up immediately - seriously.

I for one am still worried about this team - so ####### sue me.

Oi - Aussies don't #### sheep - that is the ####### kiwis - you know the country next door that is obsessed with Rugby??

Get your ####### slang right

double post

I've dated both a kiwi and an aussie, it all seems to depend which southern hemisphere oceanic anglophone nation you live in. Given how vehement both were about the proclivities of the other nation, I'm guessing it's the dirty little secret of both.

Edit: and at least New Zealand doesn't call it's national soccer team the Socceroo's whilst calling the actual sport football. That always struck me as daft especially considering that there's Australian Rules Football.

Long John, seriously mate, you need to chill.

Suck my ####, Jordan

I presume you are about 16 years old as your grasp of the English language appears limited. Since you don't really have the capability to snark with the witticism worthy of Twain or Wilde, I'll assume you left school 15 and just maybe, I'll feel little sorry for you.

Given how vehement both were about the proclivities of the other nation, I'm guessing it's the dirty little secret of both.

I've pretty much never given a #### about what people say about Aussies - anyone who knows me , will testify to that.

What is funny is that we own a pub called The Spotted Cow - can I rename it the Spotted Cowfelcher??

can I rename it the Spotted Cowfelcher

Primey post.

Sorry - just had to add this - from urban dictionary

Sheep Shagger

An insult hurled at new zealanders, by australians mostly. it is a reference to the sheep prominence in new zealand- ten sheep to every person. sheep cant breed that fast on their own, so the "sheep shaggers" help

And I like Kiwis

For anyone interested, most losses at the time the pitcher wins #200 (1919-onward):

208 Bobo Newsom
189 Frank Tanana
188 Paul Derringer
188 Jerry Koosman
186 Charlie Hough
185 Ted Lyons
184 Red Ruffing
183 Nolan Ryan
183 Jack Quinn
180 Eppa Rixey
179 Sad Sam Jones
179 Tim Wakefield

Yeah, sheep is the Kiwis. And the Welsh.

208 Bobo Newsom
189 Frank Tanana
188 Paul Derringer
188 Jerry Koosman
186 Charlie Hough
185 Ted Lyons HOF HOM
184 Red Ruffing HOF HOM
183 Nolan Ryan HOF HOM
183 Jack Quinn
180 Eppa Rixey HOF HOM
179 Sad Sam Jones
179 Tim Wakefield

The thread about Bobo Newsom's 200th didn't have nearly this many nannied words, but the one about Jerry Koosman's was really raunchy and actually introduced several new terms for things your mom does and tax evasion.

##### #### ############ ### cowfelcher ######## ####-#### Tanana #####.

The only Aussie that ever offended my (not personally) is/was Rupert Murdoch.

The Red Sox have too good of a lineup to miss the playoffs, regardless of their SP woes. And once in the playoffs, if the pitching is still so-so, they can bash their way to success. Or get shut down, just like every other team.

Is scott doing a bit? That's some weird stuff up there.

Underneath the bit(?), he is right on the merits. While there is rarely a good reason to have a replacement level starting pitcher in your rotation, one key exception is in September when all of your starters are injured or equally bad. 40% of the Sox rotation is out for the year, another 40% is out right now, and the guys who should have been better than Wake (Lackey, Miller, Weiland) have been just as bad.

If the Sox can get Beckett and Bedard healthy for the playoffs, they'll have as good a playoff rotation as anyone. It's just that right now, without Beckett and Bedard, and with nothing but replacement level pitchers at #4 and below, the pitching stinks. Removing Tim Wakefield from said stinky pitching staff won't make it better, because there's no one better to replace him with.

I think it's going to be damn close, and Wakefield's capabilities may well be the "swing" in whether the Sox get there or not. If Lackey comes good tonight maybe we can relax a bit, but if he's still the Lackey we know and love it's an unreliable (at the moment -- probably tired) Lester, a semi-fit Beckett and a tied-together-with-bailing-wire Bedard. The difference between 0 more Wake wins and 2 more may well be the clincher, either way.

I'd still bring him back next year; the VORP/WAR stats that have him with negative value this year are WRONG. Lots of "replacement" pitchers can get you a 5.13 ERA, but not for 145 innings -- they fall apart once the innings pile up. Even Bobo Newsom was a damn good pitcher. There's a huge difference between adequate and bad; as Wake has shown this year a 5.13 ERA will get you a lot of wins with the Sox lineup.

I am glad for Tim.

Kevin Millwood, for example, could have given up a 5.5 RA for free, and he'd have won games with this offense. The offense being good doesn't give bad pitchers value.

Tim Wakefield has had value to this Red Sox team. "Replacement level" is a useful theoretical construct, but it doesn't tell us what a ballclub should do in season. If you have an "above replacement" pitcher, but he's the 6th best starter you have, he shouldn't be starting. If you have a "replacement" or "below replacement" pitcher, and he's the 4th or 5th best starter you have, he should pitch and those innings he pitches have value to your team.

The problem is that Theo's SP depth failed this year - they should have had better pitchers than Wakefield available most of the summer, and they didn't.

Millwood's 5.5 ERA tended to leave him yanked after 3-4 innings. Wake generally gives you length, as last night; this is highly valuable and not reflected in conventional stats.

Millwood's 5.5 ERA tended to leave him yanked after 3-4 innings.

Hmm? Millwood averaged 6.1 IP per start last year with an RA around the Wakefield level, and 6.3 IP per start this year at a somewhat better rate.

Millwood's pretty much the definition of a replacement level vet - he could be had on a minor league contract this May. That's Wakefield now.

And to be clear, the Sox needed replacement level veterans this year. Tim Wakefield has had real value to the Sox because otherwise they'd be trying out truly below replacement level pitchers like Brandon Duckworth or Matt Fox. Letting Millwood walk in August was a mistake that has cost the Sox games. But this is a problem of it being September and traditionally "freely available" talent no longer being available for free, and a problem of the Red Sox doing a bad job of acquiring depth starters. It doesn't mean Wakefield is any good, it means the Red Sox starting pitching is really bad.

Hilarious how every time the Sox win one out of 4, or five or six games...people come out of the woodworks to say "See! See!" and they still have given up fewer than 6 runs twice in the last 11, and are 3-6 in their last 9 series and haven't won two in a row since Aug. 27th. Aug. 27th! But yes...they're a mortal lock.

They're not a "mortal lock". They have a 90+% chance of making the postseason. It's not 100%. They could certainly fail to make the playoffs, they're just very unlikely to.

It is weird how much conversation here seems to be in terms of "doomed" or "mortal lock". There's a lot of area between 0% and 100%.

Matt

I have watched some good offenses carry poor pitching and while seeing the likes of a Bob McClure take the mound may be exasperating at times it's better than the Doc Medichs of the world

Small consolation I know.........

Millwood was undervalued because of last year's 4-16 record; he's now pitching fine for Colorado.

The worst-ever 200-game winner thing has been covered, but I'd like to point out that by ERA+ there are 19 200-game winners worse than Wake, and 8 by WAR. Lew Burdette is second to last in each category (ahead of Joe Niekro in ERA+ and Bobby Mathews in WAR), so without looking any farther than that maybe he's the worst ever 200-game winner. Or at least the worst post-1900 one.

OK thanks.
Wake has the highest raw ERA of any 200 game winner. Us haters
will have to settle for that. ;-)

Wakefield came up pretty big for the Sox in 2003 and 2004. Those two starts vs the Yanks in 03 and the Game 5 relief job in 2004 aren't going to be forgotten by this Red Sox fan anytime soon.

He's 7 away from the Red Sox record. We need him to pick up a couple of those before the year is over and hopefully he can vulture a couple as a long man/sixth starter next year before calling it a career.

Wake is awesome!

I do enjoy how those Red Sox fans calling for Wake to retire never have another option of who should be pitching in his place. No Beckett, Buchholz, Matsuzaka, Bedard - he's their 8th or 9th starter, and for an 8th or 9th starter, he's actually pretty decent. It's not like he'd be in the rotation if they had been healthier.

He's 7 away from the Red Sox record. We need him to pick up a couple of those before the year is over and hopefully he can vulture a couple as a long man/sixth starter next year before calling it a career.

Shouldn't a team that plans to make the playoffs have a 6th starter who projects above replacement level? I don't see any place for Wakefield on a properly constructed opening day roster.

I love the guy, and I'm happy for him about #200, but he's done.

I do enjoy how those Red Sox fans calling for Wake to retire never have another option of who should be pitching in his place. No Beckett, Buchholz, Matsuzaka, Bedard - he's their 8th or 9th starter, and for an 8th or 9th starter, he's actually pretty decent. It's not like he'd be in the rotation if they had been healthier.

Just to be clear, they don't have a better starter now. They should have many, many better starters for 2012.

EDIT: Also, he's not really 8th or 9th. He's ahead of both Miller and Weiland on the depth chart. He's the #7 starter if you include all of Bedard, Matsuzaka, and Bedard on the depth chart. I'd call him the 6th starter - that Bedard was only acquired after Matsuzaka was lost for the season, so Bedard replaced Matsuzaka rather than adding depth to the rotation. And the Red Sox should do better at the #6 starter slot - the problem is that Wake's decline in 2010 was apparently real skill loss, Miller still isn't a good pitcher, Doubront regressed, they cut Millwood, Weiland didn't develop enough, and Tazawa took too long to recover from surgery.

Dubront was injured this year. That hurt them a bit.

7 away from the team record. Why do I feel they'll let him try for it next year? 100th anniversary of Fenway and all that. I don't see him getting a starting spot, but I'm sure they'll give him a bullpen slot as a long man and let him make a run at it.

Congrats to him for his 200th, but Wake is done. There's no way he gets 193 for the Sox. 7 wins might as well be 70 at this point.

Matt

I think it's a ridiculously high standard to expect a 6th starter be above replacement level.

Shouldn't a team that plans to make the playoffs have a 6th starter who projects above replacement level?

Sixth starters above replacement level are fifth starters for most teams IMO.

Considering the team option and the obvious org. sentiment for him he probably comes back next year if he wants to.

He also has a lower RA than Lackey this year.

Yeah, I don't know how Wakefield can be the target for hate when the team has a SP with a 6.30 ERA! I understand resenting the over-ratedness, but 6.30, people!

God, Buchholz going down really killed this club. Lester, Beckett, and Buchholz all have ERAs under 3.50. Bedard's is 3.66 with the Sox. Wakefield, Lackey, and Miller all have ERAs over 5. Of course, 3 of the guys in the good group get hurt, while the guys in the "we suck" group stayed healthy. Awesome.

Really putting the cart before the horse but 2012;

Definitely better and in rotation: Beckett, Lester, Buchholz

Maybe better but probably in rotation: Lackey

Probably better but not in rotation: Doubront, Tazawa, Aceves

Maybe better but not in rotation: Miller, Weiland, Wilson

Last man standing: Wakefield

The first thing that strikes me is that the Sox need to sign someone this off-season. I've been talking myself into Edwin Jackson (durable, doesn't suck, still young) but let's not get into that now. What makes Wake worth keeping is he is pretty reliably replacement level and he's inexpensive. From a roster management standpoint there is some value in a pitching staff that has a guy like Wake cooling his heels in the bullpen and available to step in from time to time and make a tolerable start while better pitchers get regular turns in Pawtucket.

The problem here is that I think all three guys I listed as "probably better" should have a role on the big league club next year in some form or another. I like the idea of Tazawa partnering with Aceves as middle reliever/inning eaters and Doubront in the rotation myself.

The Gonzalez trade and some other moves have left the Sox a bit weak at the top of the minors this year. I think guys like Wilson and Weiland will be ready in April to at least be 7th/8th starters whereas heading into this year the Sox really seemed to have Doubront as the only viable alternative and when he spit the bit there went that plan.

Is Stephen Fife still in the organization? For some reason I have it in my head that he was moved in one deal or another. If he's still around he might be a guy who offers something.

Yeah, I don't know how Wakefield can be the target for hate

Forget about anything else after that. 17 years with the club, he's filled every role and for cryin' out loud he was the Roberto Clemente Award winner last year. 24 hours after Manny Ramirez reminds us what kind of ######## these guys can be that aspect of Tim Wakefield doesn't get enough credit. We don't know these guys and maybe someday I end up eating these words but Wake appears to be a genuinely good guy.

I think it's a ridiculously high standard to expect a 6th starter be above replacement level.
...
Sixth starters above replacement level are fifth starters for most teams IMO.

I admit I'm spoiled by the Red Sox resources and management, but it is not a ridiculously high standard for the Epstein/Henry Red Sox. This is a club that has had Bronson Arroyo, Wade Miller, Jon Lester and Clay Buchholz, Julian Tavarez, and Tim Wakefield (when he was ok) as their #6 starters to begin the season. Theo always aims at having six or seven above-replacement pitchers in the organization to begin the year.

He also has a lower RA than Lackey this year.

And if the Red Sox could cut Lackey and pay him nothing in 2012, they would do it. Why wouldn't they do the same with Wake?

Yeah, I don't know how Wakefield can be the target for hate

I don't like it either, and I hope my appreciation for Wake is clear. The fact that Wake deserves appreciation from the fans for his career doesn't mean that Wake deserves employment in the future as a baseball player. If Wake is willing to take a minor league contract and pitch in AAA to start the season, I'd be happy to bring him back. I don't want him projected to the MLB roster, absent a couple injuries.

MCoA, I agree with you about his 2012 rosterability. Heck, I went to a meaningless game in cold weather in late 2009 because I thought it was Wake's last home start.

And if the Red Sox could cut Lackey and pay him nothing in 2012, they would do it. Why wouldn't they do the same with Wake?

I hope that the same people who complain about Wake getting starts because of sentimentality (not you specifically, just Sox Therapy in general) will also complain that Lackey is only in the 2012 rotation because of his contract.

Lackey's going to be an interesting case. He has stayed in the rotation this year for the same reason Wake has - suck though he does, he sucks less than his prospective replacements.

There's a reasonably good chance he's been pitching hurt. In that case, one hopes he gets the treatment he needs and returns healthy. If he hasn't been pitching hurt, the Sox will have to have a quite short leash on him next year - in normal situations, you can't keep running a 2011 John Lackey out there in the hopes he turns it around.

In fact, because of Lackey, starting pitching depth is of particular importance for the Red Sox next year. Because Lackey may be around and may still be terrible, it's that much more important that the #6 and #7 starters are better than Tim Wakefield.

The Sox have shown a willingness to punt contracts when the player didn't perform. Renteria, Lugo, Lowell, even Ortiz at the start of last year was being eased out when he got hot. Whether they are willing to tell Lackey "you come to Spring Training with no guarantees of a rotation spot" would be a hell of a thing. 3 years, $54 million is a LOT to have hanging out in the bullpen playing with the band.

Oh Darren, you are so wrong here. I am one of the few who have NOT wavered at all in the belief that this team will make the playoffs.

This is what your unwavering confidence sounded like just two short days ago:

With the way NY is playing, they might take the division with 11-6. They've just gone 3-10; no way they are going 3-10 over the next 13 games. And with 17 games to go, I'd much rather have the 3 game lead, then be chasing like Tampa. Every loss they suffer is like 2 games gone. If Tampa goes all Rockies and pulls a 20-1 stretch, well there's nothing you can do about that. I also think they have been overly cautious with Beckett. Thinking they could cruise to the wild card and rest him until the playoffs. If he's needed to help clinch, he will pitch.

How many differentways do indicate that the playoffs are in jeopardy? I count about 30, but I may have missed some.

And no I apparently could not let that go.

Darren, that quote sounds pretty confident to me, especially compared to all the doomsaying going on around here.

Darren is a good man. He's also the King of the Pants Pissers.