User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.5689 seconds
61 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
1. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: May 22, 2010 at 03:14 PM (#3539700)Next question...
If they wanted him to hurt, they should have done it before he got 82.5 million.
Yet another Theo stuff-up.
Not only are you saying Wake isn't worse, you're saying Tim is a 'much' better pitcher than John Lackey. Despite his ERA+ being worse than John Lackey's at every point since 2005? 43 year old Tim Wakefield is a MUCH better pitcher than 31 year old John Lackey?
nnk.
How can the front office know what the #### Wake is going to do?? His back is a joke - he is toast every year by September anyway
Lackey has been throwing a cut fastball this year for the first time in his career, If Pitch fx is to believed. His command is nowhere near his historical baselines, so if you ask me, I say this special-cause variation has to be a factor in that.
I want to know why the change in pitch selection. Anyone have Farrell's cell number?
humgongo postseason choke-King.
Sorry km...
Lackey will sort things out. He's a pro, babe.
Your methodology for discovering "chokers" still seems entirely arbitrary to me.
EDIT: I mean, look at the endpoints here. I assume you don't think Wakefield was choking in the 2003 ALCS when he carried the club to that seventh game - that's why the Boone HR is the endpoint. But then after that comes his three innings to save the Red Sox in Game 5, which you acknowledge are clutch. If a guy can both turn in those sorts of performances and also be a "humgongo choke-King", the title doesn't seem to mean much.
EDIT2: Either way, I love the word "humgongo". So we've got that.
His postseason ERA since 2003 is beyond horrible--that's my methodology. The appearance you refer to was the only exception. It took his ERA for that storied series all the way down to 8.59...
That's just it. Wake is also awful in every big game* during the regular season.
*A big game in the regular season is defined by Teddy as "games Wake pitches poorly in."
$17M a year is a lot for a 3/4 starter.
Kind of encapsulates the whole season so far, really.
Since the thread started and you posted, he's dropped back down to fourth-best starter.
Yes, the fact that's he's absolutely sadly embarrassed himself in every single series since then is completely random.
I'm not gonna argue with perceptions. I watched the games since 2003, and I saw a nervous
wreck who had no idea where his pitch was going, BB'd like crazy, and got rocked for 6 HR's in
about 15 innings, and lost his playoff gig, in essence.
Tell me with a straight face you want Wake to start a future playoff game for the Red Sox. So I know what I'm dealing with.
It's 24 innings spread over 6 years.
I know you are a Beckett fan but he's "sadly embarrassed himself" since 2007, with a 7.71 ERA in his last 21 playoff innings. I am sure you'd be comfortable with him starting a playoff game despite that.
Propecia is fool's gold.
Wake's crappiness is in 7 appearances, while Josh's is in 4, much of it injured.
Of course I would. And so would Tito. Because we've observed the ballplayers we're talking about.
Yeah, me too. What I've observed about Beckett is that he's a fat lump who can't locate in the zone anymore. Just as long as we're saying ridiculous ####.
And I'll try again. Would you give Wake a playoff start? Don't avoid the question. I would not give him one, unless there were no other viable starter available. I understand that the sample size is small, but that's the nature of this beast. Like you said in a recent thread about relievers, with small samples one needs to rely mainly on observation. I observed a knuckeballer who was BB'ing ~ 6 per nine in between bombs. Maybe you saw a pitcher who was getting nickle and dimed to death. Can't argue with perceptions, but the notion that Tim Wakefield has a postseason monkey on his back is far fom ridiculous. His numbers in the playoffs are terrible.
But here's hoping he goes on a May-June hot streak.
29-So now these particular assertions about Beckett are "ridiculous ####"? Very cute move, when it seems to me you were dead serious the exact same points it in a recent thread. You don't like Beckett, we get it.
He's been hurt. Bad back.
The guy who already had 12 years of MLB experience was completely rattled by Boone's homer and has soiled himself everytime he takes the mound since
or
A knuckleballer notorious for alternating the brilliant with the horrible has gotten knocked around in a few random starts.
No I wouldn't. That has nothing to do with me thinking he's some kind of mental and emotional midget and everything to do with the fact that he's not deserving of it. At best he's the fifth best starter on the Sox and given his age/health you always are taking a chance when you throw him out there at this point.
My reasoning, though, is that Tim Wakefield is the same pitcher in the postseason that he is in the regular season, and the regular season Tim Wakefield is the 6th best starter on the club. If the Red Sox were a different club, one with a huge offense, a solid front three in the rotation, and Wakefield among some averagish guys at the back of the rotation, I would have absolutely no problem thinking of Wakefield as the 4th starter in the postseason.
EDIT: another way of saying this is that in both 2007 and 2008, Tim Wakefield was the Red Sox #4 starter, and I think that was clearly the right choice in retrospect.
To do the comparison right, it should be between Wakefield and pitchers somewhat worse than he is. Obviously Wakefield shouldn't start ahead of better pitchers. I take Wakefield ahead of pitchers who aren't as good as him, because I don't think Tim Wakefield is a different pitcher in the regular season and in the postseason. Do you go with the worse pitcher because of fears that Wakefield is unclutch?
And if he's on one of those 1995/2002/2009 first half runs when the postseason rolls around, I start him ahead of everyone including probably Lester.
It is not to be believed.
Lets just see if his back holds up till July - and I don't think (hope) he will ever start a playoff game for the Sox again.
karlmagnus, everybody! Let's give him a hand.
To clarify this, I'd have him 6th. If Bowden came up this year because of a few injuries to starters, and threw well, I'd start him
over Wake. In other words, if a guy like Bowden appeared to be an average-ish alternative, he'd get the nod. Right now, Wake is my #6 choice to get a playoff start.
Well, the miraculous, edge of disaster relief stint vs the NYY's in 2004 aside (and it was beautiful), all four times he's started since he's stunk badly. Walks and HR's. This entire thing began as a response to the notion km's statement that Wake has been a better pitcher than Lackey. I don't think the 4 horrible starts in a row are random, but most of you seem to. Before 2003 the guy was a mixed bag in the playoffs. Since then he's been awful.
Also, to be clear--I'm not saying the Boone HR caused anything, just that it seems to roughly demarcate the point where he started to suck.
But it had to weight heavy on Wakes's heart. I remember reading that he was inconsolable...
Let's say Wake in 2010 goes 12-6 with a 4.35 ERA, and Lackey and Dice go, umm, 8-11 with a 4.95 ERA, and 11-10 with a 4.80 ERA. I'd give the nod to Lackey and Dice over Wake in a situation where the 3 were the options for 4th starter. This is the sort of choice-scenario I'm talking about. I don't trust Wake in the playoffs anymore. I feel the 4 awful outings in a row are far more meaningful than you do. He wasn't nickle and dimed, he was crushed. If there was any daylight at all to pick another vet over Wake, I'm going with the vet. And give me a good enough excuse, I'll go with the kid as well.
Let's hope the team encounters this problem.
Lackey 51-45 3.91 ERA
Timmy 67-89 (.429), 4.75 ERA
Tim doesn't fare as well against the good teams.
Ernie Shore says you should read more books about baseball players.
$160mil just isn't worth what is used to be. Back in the old days you could get yourself a flakey LF who could really rake for $160mil....
1 MPH may be within variance, so that may not be real.
But in general, a pitcher like Lackey would be someone who cannot afford to lose too much velocity off his fastball. Otherwise, hitters can sit on his other array of pitches.
As I also recall, most of the Sox fans(including me) thought it was a reasonable move with the exception of maybe being a year too long. So who knows sometimes. Hey earlier in the year I would've been happy to see them get rid of Papi, I really did think he was gone for all money this time, now he's OPSing over .900.
Referring to an earlier thread...AND this is why I am NOT a GM.
Well, John Lackey IS a better pitcher than Tim Wakefield so I think that is to be expected. Wake survives on a trick pitch basically so the idea that he struggles against better teams should not come as a particular shock. I don't think anyone (well, Karl but...) is of the opinion that Wake is anything more than a useful innings eater type and obviously with the injuries/age the inning eating portion of that gets secondary.
Where I (and I think MCoA though I don't want to put words in his mouth) take issue with what you are saying is you are assigning a personality trait to someone's performance. I think suggesting that Wake is Mr. Choke is just as foolish as the idea that David Eckstein or Derek Jeter has some magical pixie dust that makes his teams win. He doesn't suck but obviously he is not very good against top teams and putting him out there against those teams is probably not a good idea. That's not a matter of mental weakness, it's a matter of being an average/below-average pitcher.
Yeah, that's $160 million of not so wonderful terrific so far.
Assuming you are not measuring him against a true #1 (Lester, this year, though Buchholz is close.) then whether you start him in the postseason depends on what kind of start you need. He will have a high probability of giving you length, but the quality will be more variable than with most pitchers, ranging from unhittable on his good days to 8 runs in 5IP on his bad ones. If your offense is working well, a reliably mediocre pitcher (Lackey) may be a better option. If not, roll the dice with Wake -- he will have a better chance of winning a 2-1 ballgame than most.
And if he's on one of his rare rolls, he counts as an ace by any standards, based on results.
Lackey
150
119
118
91 with Boston
Beckett
138
108
118
95 with Boston
Penny
104
147
67
84 with Boston
Wells
118
106
104
102 with Boston
Miller
132
106
131
92 with Boston
Schilling
157
142
159
150 with Boston
Clement
112
106
120
99 with Boston
We could also add the Piniero and Smoltz cases to this, though both were coming off injuries and given different roles so it's hard to compare. We could also add Matsuzaka, though I don't have any ERA+ translations for him for his Japan time. But it's fair to say that these three guys were all disappointing in their first year in Boston.
Just for fun let's strip out the names and just list those 28 seasons in descending order of ERA+:
159
157
150 with Boston
150
147
142
138
132
131
120
119
118
118
118
112
108
106
106
106
104
104
102 with Boston
99 with Boston
95 with Boston
92 with Boston
91 with Boston
84 with Boston
67
I think this is true.
the three-run HR's. Bad form.
I'm fine with the Wake as the long man role in the playoffs, if we get there, and if he's healthy. Just don't start him.
In this ballpark, in this division, with the sometimes-iffy defense behind them, pitchers have to adjust and unlearn bad habits that they perhaps got away with in other places and divisions, but here will kill them.[/WAG]
Over the course of his career (which you are discussing) and on May 27, 2010 (which I was discussing) are two different things.
That's an interesting list. Just a quick eyeballing suggests a few broad categories;
Injury - Penny, Miller, Smoltz if you include him were all rehab projects of one sort of another
Age - Wells, Schilling were older and some decline was in order. I don't think either guy could be fairly evaluated as being appreciably less than was expected.
Other - Lackey, Beckett, Clement - This is the list that probably deserves the scrutiny. Some form of "adjustment to the AL East" is the easiest explaination though I'm not sold on it. My recollection of Beckett's 2006 is that the Sox were not letting him throw the curve between starts as a means of protecting against the blister issue and so in games he never had the feel for it. I don't know if that was the problem or what but it was a story that year. Clement and Lackey I got nothing on.
Lackey is a big, mouth-breathing ogre and his donkey friend wasn't able to make the trip to Boston?
Clement got a ball to the skull in the middle of the season, that can't have helped anything.
Sabathia
139
141
157
128 with NY
Burnett
115
119
104
106 with NY
Chacon
108
70
117
149 with NY
Johnson
197
110
178
112 with NY
Small
79
32
51
133 with NY
Pavano
107
98
137
89 with NY
Wright
28
55
132
70 with NY
Vazquez
130
109
139
92 with NY
Lieber
103
109
109
104 with NY
Brown
151
79
169
110 with NY
seems like the Yankees have a trend similar to the Red Sox, though perhaps not quite as disappointing. The Yankees could throw in Igawa and perhaps a few others. Putting all the Yankee seasons together (40 seasons in all):
197
178
169
157
151
149 with NY
141
139
139
137
133 with NY
132
130
128 with NY
119
117
115
112 with NY
110 with NY
110
109
109
109
108
107
106 with NY
104 with NY
104
103
98
92 with NY
89 with NY
79
79
70 with NY
70
55
51
32
28
there's a fair amount of decency there and some plain good pitching. First-year-as-a-yankee seasons are evenly divided between the top 20 seasons and the bottom 20 seasons, so the median first-year-as-a-yankee season is pretty close to the median season overall.
That once was true, but hasn't been the case recently. Since the start of 2005, Wake has allowed 29 UER in 980 IP. Lackey has yielded 42 in 1052 IP.
Here's what I'd say about each:
Lackey--incomplete.
Beckett--moved to AL/hitters park.
Penny--coming off injury and moved to AL, still actually improved on previous year.
Wells--near the end of the road and maintained about as you'd hope.
Miller--reclamation flier.
Schilling--negligible dropoff especially when you account for league.
Clement--despite moving to tougher league, he started out great. Arm injury derailed him.
Really, the only real surprise was Beckett (and perhaps Lackey, we'll see).
The seats are incredible except on balls hit directly at the wall. Anything to about the warning track you lose and you have to rely on the crowd to sort of inform you.
My recollection (it's been about five years since I was up there) is that quite a few people brought gloves.
Bring the glove. Clearly, being a dork anyway, you might as well steer into the skid.
Describe yourself, and where your seats are, so we can know what kind of guy to look for when we try to see you on TV.
I've sat up there for a few games, good times.
Old BBTF joke. Eric Enders declared me a Wilford Brimley lookalike sans any firsthand knowledge and it stuck for a while.
####### hilarious though.
@Harvey--Eric Enders, eh? Well, he's definitely immoral. ;)
There. Done.
Darren, bring the glove.
Don't fall!
Enough of this crap. Let's see what Doubront can do.
/end of rant
The interesting discovery was that the Coke deck SRO and the Monster SRO ($35!) are nice! The former have picnic tables behind them where you can sit for a while.
I was a bit torn last night. On the one hand I think he ran into bad luck, there were at least three balls that I thought should have been caught with a more competent outfield but on the other hand you can spin all you want and 14 base runners in 6 innings against a less than impressive offensive team like Oakland is troubling. In its own way it was more worrisome than his recent starts because he threw strikes last night and still got crummy results.
I always loved those stats. "Tim Wakefield is 53-0 with a 0.63 ERA against the Rays" or whatever the numbers were. It seemed like everyone always wanted to say "it's the dome!" and it never struck anyone that maybe, just maybe, it was the fact that for 10 years the Rays were a glorified AAA team.
The Sox are 2-6 in games he's started, 3-9 in games he's appeared in. How many more chances does he get? I say one more such stinker, and we go with anybody else we can dredge-up. Even Boof.
And yes Dan, Bogar is Leonard Pinth-Garnell bad.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main