DLowe 8 years later.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later. : A fine nomination for sure!!!  Possibly the most high stress innings I've ever watched, think I was going through 3 beers an inning from about the 8th inning on.
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    Only 1 hit and 1 walk w/4 K's. Redemption for game 7 from the year before.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    There are some guys who are untouchables from the recent era:

    Schilling
    Ortiz
    Pedro
    Pedrioa
    Youk
    Tek
    Roberts
    I could be missing a few - maybe Paplebon.......

    RE:  Beckett.  I will never forget Beckett for what he did in 2007.  But the guy is turning into a world class a----hole and he's just not a good enough pitcher to deal w/ his BS.........
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later. : Hence, we know where this dance ends.  20/20 hindsight is the explanation when it suits your argument.  And acting like the 2007 Lowell exention was not viewed as a risky move/contract at the time is just plain revisionist history. 
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    The bold indicates how you're viewing things. You ignore Lowe's decline in his last two years becausue he excelled in the National League.

    I haven't viewed any of these situations in hindsight. Show me where. Show me one trade I've defended or ridiculed where I use hindsight as my argument.

    I've looked at all of them from how they were viewed at the time. Hence the Lowell contract. It wasn't considered that risky. He was just 33 -- not that old -- it was just a three-year deal, and he was coming off four consecutive years of 150-plus games and had just one year where he missed considerable time and still played 130 games. He was considered durable, which is why it wasn't considered risky. He didn't have the injury history a Beltre had for example.

    To later view it was a bad trade because he got an injury you couldn't predict is the exact definition of hindsight.
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from IGatorbait. Show IGatorbait's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later. : Sorry but the greatest relief appearance in postseason history belongs to Mr. Pedro Martinez.  Game 5 '99 vs. CLE  6 IP 0 hits.  It was maybe Pedro's finest moment and that says a lot. 
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    spot on ... my favorite player in my lifetime, had a gazillion fine moments but that was the pinnacle ... with his arm hanging like it should have been in sling no less ...
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later. : spot on ... my favorite player in my lifetime, had a gazillion fine moments but that was the pinnacle ... with his arm hanging like it should have been in sling no less ...
    Posted by IGatorbait[/QUOTE]

    If you want to explain to someone what a change up can do, just pop the video in of that game.  The greatest display of the change ever caught on tape!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    Roy did you say Dlowe was declining because he pitched only 180+ innings???? i wish our starters could decline like that...lol
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    Please - just look at what Lowe did when he was w/ LA - the contract we passed on

    Average />200 Innings

    ERA was ~ 3.5

    WHIP was ~ 1.25

    and in 2008, pitched 2 very good games in the playoffs

    Compare that to Matt Clement and this is another one of those classic Theo mistakes

    I go back to what I said before - if we kept Lowe in 2008 we probably (1) win the division (2) get past the Rays and (3) have a good chance to repeat in the WS....it would have been totally worth it to keep him - battle tested in Boston, doesn't miss his starts, doesn't give up walks and keep the ball in the ball park......It's a no brainer and completely unworthy of further debate.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]Roy did you say Dlowe was declining because he pitched only 180+ innings???? i wish our starters could decline like that...lol
    Posted by georom4[/QUOTE]

    C'mon Geo, you're better than that. The big point was his ERA going from under 3.00 to 4-plus then 5-plus. That showed he was in decline. The innings simply were declining from the previous two innings. So if the trend continued ...

    Like I've posted. Becasue of his age and how he finished, I would have gambled and signed him. But it's not unreasonable to have questions about his future when you look how his ERA was skyrocketing from 2002 to 2004. That's all I'm saying.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    i dont know roy....180 innings plus a guy who pitched a lot of ground balls at fenway and was nails in the postseason...i hated letting him go...i think your point is clearly made but in context, not a good decision then or now
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]Please - just look at what Lowe did when he was w/ LA - the contract we passed on Average />200 Innings ERA was ~ 3.5 WHIP was ~ 1.25 and in 2008, pitched 2 very good games in the playoffs Compare that to Matt Clement and this is another one of those classic Theo mistakes I go back to what I said before - if we kept Lowe in 2008 we probably (1) win the division (2) get past the Rays and (3) have a good chance to repeat in the WS....it would have been totally worth it to keep him - battle tested in Boston, doesn't miss his starts, doesn't give up walks and keep the ball in the ball park......It's a no brainer and completely unworthy of further debate.
    Posted by andrewmitch[/QUOTE]

    There's no chance you get that from Lowe if he stays in Boston.  He hadn't posted numbers like that for years before he left.  Time after time you see pitchers look good in LA or San Diego that cannot hack it in the AL or even with other NL Teams - Chan Ho Park, Brad Penny, Jeff Weaver, Ted Lilly, Lowe, Kevin Brown.  Lowe would have been lucky to be as effective as Wakefield.


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from teamguy. Show teamguy's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    I honestly think he FO here has a tendency to undervalue players who can thrive in this bubble. Superstars elsewhere don't necessarily translate to winners here. Derek Lowe was a guy who could deliver in this park. Seems like management falls in love with players only to bring them here and watch them implode. And players that perform well get shipped out for the next 'hot' player on the radar. Meanwhile Papelbon is having a great year as well.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN. Show COMMUNIST-CONTRARIAN's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]I think Derek will be warmly received , without a doubt. He has had a remarkable career. Unless I am mistaken , he has never been on the disabled list. Very durable. The odd thing about Lowe is that  Tito , in one of his best decisions , skipped Wakefield for the ALCS Game 7 start and went with DLowe on two days rest. The rest is history.  Then ,for some reason ,the Sox let Lowe go and kept Wake.  I hate to say it , but watch him out pitch Beckett tonight.
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]one of theo's MANY questionable free agent decisions. yep y sign this guy who partied a lot, most likely to have a breakdown, ditto with the SS orlando something. y sign him and get long-term stability when he parties when we can get the edgar rentaria. oh that theo, the gift that kept on giving in free agancy!
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]I honestly think he FO here has a tendency to undervalue players who can thrive in this bubble. Superstars elsewhere don't necessarily translate to winners here. Derek Lowe was a guy who could deliver in this park. Seems like management falls in love with players only to bring them here and watch them implode. And players that perform well get shipped out for the next 'hot' player on the radar. Meanwhile Papelbon is having a great year as well.
    Posted by teamguy[/QUOTE]

    That has always been my mantra on the FO going as far back as 2005. Bay played well in Fenway, Beltre loved Fenway, Lowe thrived in the postseason, Cabrera was as outstanding a SS for 3-4 months as any in Sox history. But instead forcefeed Sox Nation with Carl Crawford, who was always a bad fit BEFORE he was signed, or John Lackey (exceeded Lowe money), or Edgar Renteria (Larussa warned he couldn't take the pressurecooker). No one ever does a personality test or researches a player with proper grilling PRIOR to bringing a player in to the Sox. It's always, oh, oh, I want him, and then they get him. It's frustrating to see the team become an under .500 joke.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later. : That has always been my mantra on the FO going as far back as 2005. Bay played well in Fenway, Beltre loved Fenway, Lowe thrived in the postseason, Cabrera was as outstanding a SS for 3-4 months as any in Sox history. But instead forcefeed Sox Nation with Carl Crawford, who was always a bad fit BEFORE he was signed, or John Lackey (exceeded Lowe money), or Edgar Renteria (Larussa warned he couldn't take the pressurecooker). No one ever does a personality test or researches a player with proper grilling PRIOR to bringing a player in to the Sox. It's always, oh, oh, I want him, and then they get him. It's frustrating to see the team become an under .500 joke.
    Posted by dannycater[/QUOTE]

    But Theo hired a PI to follow Crawford and signed him despite the owner's protests....now that's a joke. The PI should at least refund the money!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    I think the thing that I always remembered about CC was his ability to butcher the Monster left field, which made him an absolute no-no for the Sox. Instead it was to this day one of the most ill-advised, ill-timed and worst signings in MLB history. Bad fit, most of us knew it was a bad fit, and they did it anyway. Dumb.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from notin. Show notin's posts

    Re: DLowe 8 years later.

    In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later.:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: DLowe 8 years later. : Theo had his mind set on Matt Clement over the guy who won game 7 in Yankee stadium and the clinching game of the World Series.  Lowe continues to start 34 games a year, Clement has been out of baseball since 2008. 
    Posted by Thesemenarecowards[/QUOTE]

    Not true.

    Plan A that offseason was Carl Pavano.  And like Lowe, Pavano is still active...
     
  20. This post has been removed.

     

Share