Aceves

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mr.YankeeBabe. Show Mr.YankeeBabe's posts

    Re: Aceves

    Aceves is what he is. If he was so good he wouldn't be a journeyman 5th starter.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Aceves

    On the bright side you guys got Pedro Feliciano, right?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Aceves

    Aceves has been awesome. There is only one slight downside to his season:

    21 Inherited runners
    8 Inherited runners scored (4 of them were Wake's runners)

    I think Aceves does very well following Miller and others, but perhaps someone else should relieve Wake.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : you often question anyones motive that expresses some sort concern, thats what it predictable.
    Posted by Mikeyinthebronx2[/QUOTE]

    Not true. I respond to chronic behavior only and you don't like it because you like to see the BDC forum in a state of bickering, cat fights, and pizzin contests. You come here for entertainment and hope for the Jerry Springer Show. You prefer pot stirring, controversy, name-calling, and trolling. 

    If it were all baseball talk then you, Yazzer, and Babe would find it to be boring and leave. You won't let Sox fans talk Red Sox baseball but need to bring up comparisons to the Yankees and and annoy like Babe does. Do you condone Babe's routine? I never hear you criticise Babe for his trolling ( to flame, incite, annoy).

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ..>TheBabe<... Show ..>TheBabe<..'s posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : I wouldn't be to concerned about over working Aceves, last night was the first time in August that he pitched more than an inning and a third, his total innings for the month of August to date is only 9 (24 since the AS break)...pre break he totaled 58 innings with four starts accounting for 21 of his 58. He's made 39 appearances pitched 82.1 innings...if we subtract the starts and innings he pitched in May when he started that gives him 35 relief apperances with 61 innings pitched or about 2 innings per appearance...which is about the norm for a middle reliver in the Sox pen...to me the critical number is how many appearances a reliever makes and how often do they get up in the pen...Aceves has only pitched back to back days 3 times all year... http://espn.go.com/mlb/player/_/id/29223/alfredo-aceves

    Posted by Beantowne[/QUOTE]

    Ummm...you can't just subtract those innings as they still count.

    It's like saying that if you subtract the games in which the other team has scored more runs then the red flops would have a perfect record.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Aceves

    LOL, he's still the pitching MVP of the team, but it does seem he does better in a tag team with Miller, tag team with Bedard, then he would a tag team with Wakes. His best situation is the enter the game in the 7th routine. I hated to see him come in to short outing as a setup guy. He's the perfect long reliever.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Aceves

    moon always excuses for Wake's numbers, man o man. Even I as a Wake supporter don't defend the fact he is not nearly what he used to be.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : Ummm...you can't just subtract those innings as they still count. It's like saying that if you subtract the games in which the other team has scored more runs then the red flops would have a perfect record.
    Posted by .. />TheBabe<..[/QUOTE]

    Of course you can and you should if one is calculating innings pitched per relief start. There is no other alternative. 

    Innings pitched in relief/ relief appearances = Av. innings pitched per relief appearance

    Even a caveman would know this.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ..>TheBabe<... Show ..>TheBabe<..'s posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : Not true. I respond to chronic behavior only and you don't like it because you like to see the BDC forum in a state of bickering, cat fights, and pizzin contests. You come here for entertainment and hope for the Jerry Springer Show. You prefer pot stirring, controversy, name-calling, and trolling.  If it were all baseball talk then you, Yazzer, and Babe would find it to be boring and leave. You won't let Sox fans talk Red Sox baseball but need to bring up comparisons to the Yankees and and annoy like Babe does. Do you condone Babe's routine? I never hear you criticise Babe for his trolling ( to flame, incite, annoy).

    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]

    Man you are f'n clueless.

    Your tired troll police act causes more bickering than anything else on the board. Not too mention that if it weren't for posters like me, you wouldn't like it here either because you are certainly not here to talk baseball.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ..>TheBabe<... Show ..>TheBabe<..'s posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : Of course you can and you should if one is calculating innings pitched per relief start. There is no other alternative.  Innings pitched in relief/ relief appearances = Av. innings pitched per relief appearance Even a caveman would know this.

    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]

    Another swing and a miss by the pikester.

    We were discussing whether he was being overworked or not. Not what his innings per relief appearance are.

    Please stay out of baseball related posts and stick to your troll police role as you clearly know nothing about a game you never watch.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mikeyinthebronx2. Show Mikeyinthebronx2's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : Not true. I respond to chronic behavior only and you don't like it because you like to see the BDC forum in a state of bickering, cat fights, and pizzin contests. You come here for entertainment and hope for the Jerry Springer Show. You prefer pot stirring, controversy, name-calling, and trolling.  If it were all baseball talk then you, Yazzer, and Babe would find it to be boring and leave. You won't let Sox fans talk Red Sox baseball but need to bring up comparisons to the Yankees and and annoy like Babe does. Do you condone Babe's routine? I never hear you criticise Babe for his trolling ( to flame, incite, annoy).
    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]

    This is you, we offer a different point of view while you fight and argue with EVERYONE both Sox and Yankee fans....you're the most confrontational poster on this forum.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]moon always excuses for Wake's numbers, man o man. Even I as a Wake supporter don't defend the fact he is not nearly what he used to be.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    I agree. He is now better than he used to be.

    His best 2.5 year strecth was from 2007-mid 2009. He was age 41-43 in that time period. His numbers this year compare very well with that timeframe's numbers, except maybe ERA. His numbers before 2007 were worse than now.

    Either you think Wake was never good, or you are misremembering what he "used to be". 

    Wake's WHIP career average at age 33 was higher than every year afterwards! His WHIP this year, is his 2nd lowest in 6 years. His BB/9 is the best of all Sox starters from 2010-2011. He's holding runners better than ever from SBs. He's fielding well again. He's let up 3 ERs or less in 10 out of 17 starts this year. Since he became a regular starter, he has more starts and more IP than any Sox pitcher (saving our pen).

    In many ways, he is better than he "used to be". 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]Aceves has been awesome. There is only one slight downside to his season: 21 Inherited runners 8 Inherited runners scored (4 of them were Wake's runners) I think Aceves does very well following Miller and others, but perhaps someone else should relieve Wake.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
     Part of the problem is that Francona usually doesn't hook Wake until he's in deep trouble with the bases juiced or runners at 2nd & 3rd after a double has plated 2 more runs. When this happens and there aren't any outs or maybe one out it's pretty difficult to not allow any inherited runners to score. Last night with Miller there was one out and only a runner at 1st base. A situation like that is alot less stressful on the guy coming in from the pen.  The lesson I take from this is that Tito has to hook Wake sooner, when the reliever will have a liitle bit of a margin for error.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from small-package. Show small-package's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Aceves:
    [QUOTE]Is Aceves the best pick up ever? He's been such a great addition to the team. The only time I saw him struggling was when the sweat was dripping down off his cap in front of his eyes. I still think there should be something they can do about that in 2011. I don't get it. I can't count how many games I'm thinking "bring Aceves in". I didn't even know who this guy was when he was with the Yankees. I don't know what his record is, but I think he's saved a lot of games for us. He's going to be awesome in the post-season.
    Posted by kimsaysthis[/QUOTE]

    He may be the piching version of ortiz
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : I agree. He is now better than he used to be. His best 2.5 year strecth was from 2007-mid 2009. He was age 41-43 in that time period. His numbers this year compare very well with that timeframe's numbers, except maybe ERA. His numbers before 2007 were worse than now. Either you think Wake was never good, or you are misremembering what he "used to be".  Wake's WHIP career average at age 33 was higher than every year afterwards! His WHIP this year, is his 2nd lowest in 6 years. His BB/9 is the best of all Sox starters from 2010-2011. He's holding runners better than ever from SBs. He's fielding well again. He's let up 3 ERs or less in 10 out of 17 starts this year. Since he became a regular starter, he has more starts and more IP than any Sox pitcher (saving our pen). In many ways, he is better than he "used to be". 
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    I totally agree. He is throwing better, more consistent now than ever. His strike to ball ratio is off the charts. He doesn't ever have "control" issues related to balls and strikes. He used to have that problem at times, where he would literally lose the strike zone. Not anymore. He is throwing better than ever for him, and it's almost criminal that he has not received enough offensive support to already have his 200th win, let alone win a few games. The one game he got the support, the pen choked it away.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves :  Part of the problem is that Francona usually doesn't hook Wake until he's in deep trouble with the bases juiced or runners at 2nd & 3rd after a double has plated 2 more runs. When this happens and there aren't any outs or maybe one out it's pretty difficult to not allow any inherited runners to score. Last night with Miller there was one out and only a runner at 1st base. A situation like that is alot less stressful on the guy coming in from the pen.  The lesson I take from this is that Tito has to hook Wake sooner, when the reliever will have a liitle bit of a margin for error.
    Posted by trouts[/QUOTE]

    I agree with the difficulty it is/was to not let inherited runner score. It's harder than a lot people imagine. You come into a game, and unless you are lights out awesome, chances are pretty good a run will score if it's say 1st and 2nd and no one out. That's why I don't fault relievers who give up inherited runners. As far as the manager, not a lot of wiggle room either way. If you let a SP start an inning and they give up a few hits, you damned if you, damned if you don't on putting in a reliever. Maybe there is something to the start the reliever to start an inning approach. And that would mean pulling a pitcher AFTER an inning. Determining if they have 1 or 2 or even 3 more innings is up the manager. But I think managers also know they can turn to a reliever mid-inning depending on the situation. It's pretty hard to predict if a SP is going to lose it BEFORE an inning starts. Pitch counts are often the best predictor.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves :  Part of the problem is that Francona usually doesn't hook Wake until he's in deep trouble with the bases juiced or runners at 2nd & 3rd after a double has plated 2 more runs. When this happens and there aren't any outs or maybe one out it's pretty difficult to not allow any inherited runners to score. 


    In Wake's case, you are wrong. 
    5/1/11: Wake was yanked with a man on 1B and 2 outs. Jenks came and let Wake's run score and one of his own.
    in 5/6/11: Wake was yanked with bases loaded and one out, Aceves let up a double for 2 runs charged to Wake.
    6/8/11: Wake is yanked with a man on 1st and 2nd with 1 out. Aceves lets up 2 singles for 1 run charged to Wake.
    8/20/11: Wake is yanked with a man on 2B and 1 out. Albers comes in and lets up a run and a few more.

    Last night with Miller there was one out and only a runner at 1st base. A situation like that is alot less stressful on the guy coming in from the pen.  The lesson I take from this is that Tito has to hook Wake sooner, when the reliever will have a liitle bit of a margin for error.

    I agree here.
    Posted by trouts[/QUOTE]

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Aceves

    On the Wakefield hook I can't imagine Terry being able to hook him any sooner. He was breezing along struck out the first batter and then it was like in the blink of an eye 4-3 with a runner on second. Albers hadn't even been up that long. I was wondering if he had been up long enough when Francona went to get Wake.

    Bad night. You take your beating and move on from it. Albers was awful and the bad news there is that Albers has been slipping as of late. That leaves the bullpen looking for a guy to aside from Aceves to get us to Bard. With this rotation Aceves is going to be used for multiple inning appearances on occasions.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Aceves

    Wheeler can step it up... I hope.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Aceves : I wan't calling Diamondtalk a concern troll. His post history never showed that to be true. Yo are putting words into my mouth. There is nothing wrong with expressing a concern once in awhile but when someone does it on 99 posts out of 100, that raises a red flag.  One needs to ascertain what is continual, perpetual, and chronic behavior before you label or characterize anyone. Bosox1941 is completely predictable and the forum has him labeled. This isn't rocket science.
    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]


    Riiiiiiiiight.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Aceves

    Thank You, it took you ages to come around to see the truth. Better late than never. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]Thank You, it took you ages to come around to see the truth. Better late than never. 
    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]

    Once you see it - this truth within yourself, we'll all be better off.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from PawsoxPhil. Show PawsoxPhil's posts

    Re: Aceves

    When the forum is moderated and those that are considered to be trolls by 99% of the forum are routinely banned, then I will be happy. One would need to waterboard you in order for you to admit that Babe, Yazzer, Mikey, Georom, and Bosox1941 are trolls. You are blind or else have vested interests.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]When the forum is moderated and those that are considered to be trolls by 99% of the forum are routinely banned, then I will be happy. One would need to waterboard you in order for you to admit that Babe, Yazzer, Mikey, Georom, and Bosox1941 are trolls. You are blind or else have vested interests.
    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]

    Inward vision would help as well.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Aceves

    In Response to Re: Aceves:
    [QUOTE]When the forum is moderated and those that are considered to be trolls by 99% of the forumare routinely banned, then I will be happy. One would need to waterboard you in order for you to admit that Babe, Yazzer, Mikey, Georom, and Bosox1941 are trolls. You are blind or else have vested interests.
    Posted by PawsoxPhil[/QUOTE]


    My eyesight isn't what it used to be, I will admit.
    What I can see is the fact that the same 99% of this board you speak of has a unified opinion of you/your actions toward others - yet you choose to dismiss this.
    Why? Perhaps you should get your vision checked...
     

Share