Bard

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

    Bard

    Isn't it time for the Bard-Doubters and Bard-Haters to stop squarking?

    From the beginning of basebal, the best pitchers are starters. End of story. They pitch the most innings, and deserve the most $. Why would a good waiter be asked to do the dishes?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Bard

    Bard was dealing tonight in the cold.  He could have gone out for the 8th if he hadn't pitched out of the pen.  I still can't get over that 5 pitch inning.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: Bard

    My dobts on Bard were more about him lasting for high IP counts, like maybe 150 or so.

    And that is TBD.  I do like him as a starter so far.  I just don't like the bullpen much (recent successes aside) and think he might have more use there...
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Bard

    I know the bullpen needs help, but I'd still try to find answers elsewhere -- Cook? -- and leave Bard in the rotation. He's looked a lot better than I expected as a starter, and with the problems the rotation had last year, why mess with a good thing.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from parhunter55. Show parhunter55's posts

    Re: Bard

    Bard is arguably the best starter on the team right now.  If he had not been skipped, he would lead the team in Ks.  His ERA is already the best among starters, and his efficiency was as good tonight as any starter this season.

    I would also argue that Doubront, Lester, Buchholz and Beckett should have all been able to skip a start and come in for an inning to help bolster the bullpen.  If you believe that all four would not have been able to do what Bard did, then he is the best pitcher on the staff right now.  Where should your best pitcher be, given that he can start or relieve?  I have always felt that in that case you put him in the rotation. 

    I understand the other side of the argument, but I think the fix of the bullpen has to come from other sources.  Bard alone would not fix it anyway.  Hill, Melancon, Bailey, Jenks all have a responsibility to try to recoup and be part of the fix, since they are the reason it is broken, before you halt what could be the beginning of a really good career as a starter.  Bard may be the ace this staff lacks.  Lester and Buchholz have disappointingly shown they are not.  Beckett perhaps was, back in 2007. but is not one now.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from never1954. Show never1954's posts

    Re: Bard

    I will admit that I am one of those put Bard back in the pen guys but, Hard to argue with what he has done in the rotation so far.  I thnk this team finally has starters stepping up and doing thier job.  I do think that if the RS are worried about innings for Bard and they currently have options to save some of them.  Should be fun to watch with Cook, Hill and Dice soon to be returning.  Its finally nice to have options.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from SinceYaz. Show SinceYaz's posts

    Re: Bard

    In Response to Bard:
    [QUOTE]Isn't it time for the Bard-Doubters and Bard-Haters to stop squarking? From the beginning of basebal, the best pitchers are starters. End of story. They pitch the most innings, and deserve the most $. Why would a good waiter be asked to do the dishes?
    Posted by bosoxmal[/QUOTE]

    I was glad for the experiment but had my doubts.  He seems to be maturing quickly.   

       Besser und besser!

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Bard

    I was also a "move Bard to the bullpen" guy but he's practially our best starter right now and an "ace" is harder to find than a very good closer/setup type, where you can sometimes find lightning in a bottle for season. At this point I'm willing to support his dream of being a starter pitcher. Team is looking a tad better than I thought and Bard is one of main reasons why...
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Bard

    repeat after me..starters are more valuable than relief pitchers...

    once again...
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mchampion. Show Mchampion's posts

    Re: Bard

    I for one wanted Bard to close because of the poor pen.  He is turning into a pretty solid starter early on this year.  If we can find a good closer I am all for keeping him starting, just not at the expense of losing games.  But then again I don't care about the money issue, I just want the sox to win games.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Bard

    Let's not get carried away.  I still think he's better served as a reliever.  Remember, that wasn't exactly the yankees, Tigers, or Rangers.

    That said, he pitched a GREAT game last night and for that he should be congratulated. 

    He could possibly be on the road to a nice transformation.  But again it puzzles me that if a guy has 1 great start, he's great but if he has 4 terrible starts it's just "a small sample size"........I supposed nothing should amaze me here after what?  20,000 posts???
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Bard

    I was never a "hater" -- whoever coined that term should be exiled to somewhere remote and cold -- but I had doubts about Bard as a starter. The reason he became a reliever is because he struggled as a starter.

    However, look at Bard's numbers in his three starts.

    First: 5-8-5-5-1-6
    Second: 6.2-4-1-1-7-7
    Third: 7-6-3-2-1-6

    Significant improvement each time out. That's the most positive thing I see. Though I still think he's our best option as a closer, he's also been our most consistent starter to date. So let's keep him there.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Bard

    Yeah I changed my mind.  I have no idea why you would call someone a Bard hater or a Bard doubter just because they think he is valuable in the bullpen though.  That is kind of ridiculous to phrase things that way.

    Regardless he is pitching extremely well and should stay in the rotation mos def.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Bard

    He was skipped because they're trying to limit his innings, it had nothing to do with skipping the worst pitcher. 

    Bard will be returning to the bullpen this season... just not until he gets up to 130-140 IP.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Bard

    In response to "Re: Bard": [QUOTE]He was skipped because they're trying to limit his innings, it had nothing to do with skipping the worst pitcher.  Bard will be returning to the bullpen this season... just not until he gets up to 130-140 IP. Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE] I wouldn't count on it. They'll control his innings a bit, but as I've said all along, he's not going back to the pen unless he implodes as a starter or the bullpen is horrible in August/September...130-140 innings is very conservative...
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from tom-uk. Show tom-uk's posts

    Re: Bard

    In Response to Re: Bard:
    [QUOTE]repeat after me..starters are more valuable than relief pitchers... once again...
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    I'm with Geo on Bard.  I liked the move as a pen can be built much easier, look at the WS champs last year.

    Bard has been unlucky so far, he was left in for some unknown reason giving up three walks and a single in the 7th vs TB.

    So far he has a .309 BABIP, if it goes down to expected levels and he continues to pitch like he has he will be a very valuable SP.

    I would not be surprised if he is allowed to start and stays injury free that he will be a better SP going forward than Clay.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Bard

    "haters" uh ok. So if we do  not like a player or his performance we "hate" them? Are we North/South now on our opinions of our players? Is it "hate"? So extreme you peasent.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JB-3. Show JB-3's posts

    Re: Bard

    In Response to Re: Bard:
    [QUOTE]In response to "Re: Bard": I wouldn't count on it. They'll control his innings a bit, but as I've said all along, he's not going back to the pen unless he implodes as a starter or the bullpen is horrible in August/September...130-140 innings is very conservative...
    Posted by jasko2248[/QUOTE]

    I disagree, 130-140 is actually quite aggressive considering has never thrown more than 101 1/3 innings (2006 at UNC), or 91 2/3 is we're just counting pro ball (2007 including winter ball).  Much more than 140 innings and you're putting Bard at huge risk for arm troubles next season.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from jasko2248. Show jasko2248's posts

    Re: Bard

    In Response to Re: Bard:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Bard : I disagree, 130-140 is actually quite aggressive considering has never thrown more than 101 1/3 innings (2006 at UNC), or 91 2/3 is we're just counting pro ball (2007 including winter ball).  Much more than 140 innings and you're putting Bard at huge risk for arm troubles next season.
    Posted by JB-3[/QUOTE]

    We'll agree to disagree, but ask any pitcher who's both started a full season and ptiched in relief for a full season.  70 innings out of the pen is just as taxing as about 200 innings in the rotation.  Bard actually said it himself.  They'll completely shut him down before they put him back in the pen after a certain "innings count."  I'd be willing to bet any amount of money that unless he is horrific as a starter, you've seen the last of Bard pitching out of the pen on a regular basis.  It would actually be more of a risk to let him throw 140 innings and then put him back in the pen full time. 
     

Share