Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    No, Miller has a 6-3 in record and the team has won 9 out of 12 starts.

    You do realize that Wakefield's 2011 road ERA is 4.99

    You will never realize that Wakefield is old and washed up, despite big 2.5 year sample size that proves it.

     
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012? : That's good thinking moon. Is Buehrle a FA this fall?
    Posted by carnie[/QUOTE]

    Sure 2012 FAs:

    Mark Buehrle CWS 
    Bruce Chen KC 
    Kyle Davies KC 
    Justin Duchscherer OAK 
    Jeff Francis KC 
    Freddy Garcia NYY 
    Aaron Harang SD 
    Rich Harden OAK 
    Livan Hernandez WAS 
    Edwin Jackson CWS 
    Kenshin Kawakami ATL 
    Scott Kazmir LAA 
    Hiroki Kuroda LAD 
    Rodrigo Lopez CHC 
    Paul Maholm PIT 
    John Maine COL 
    Jason Marquis WAS 
    Kevin Millwood NYY 
    Brad Penny DET 
    Oliver Perez NYM 
    Joel Pineiro LAA 
    CC Sabathia NYY (may opt out) 
    Carlos Silva NYY 
    Javier Vazquez FLA 
    Tim Wakefield BOS 
    Chien-Ming Wang WAS 
    Brandon Webb ARI 
    C.J. Wilson TEX 
    Chris Young NYM 

    If we can get 1 in red and 2 in blue, I may still want Wake as our #8 guy. If we get 4 guys (red or blue) I'll be leading the parade to dump Wake.

    I just don't think we'll even get 2 of these guys. Some of them look like Lackey redos.


     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]No, Miller has a 6-3 in record and the team has won 9 out of 12 starts.
    Yes, I know. That is why I said it was "about" the only stat he leads in.

    You do realize that Wakefield's 2011 road ERA is 4.99

    Yes, and in math class, I learned that 4.99 in under 5.00. Did you miss the short bus that day?

    You will never realize that Wakefield is old and washed up, despite big 2.5 year sample size that proves it.
     
    Miller's been "washed up" for longer. He has worse numbers than Wake since your chosen timeframe of mid 2009 to present.
    Worse ERA 
    Worse road ERA
    Worse WHIP
    Worse IP/GS
    Worse opp's OPS
    Worse everything but age and belt size.
    Posted by 1958lesspaul[/QUOTE]
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    I feel entirely confident the Sox will sweep tomorows double header, I base this off disregarding the facts.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Road record and less than full commitment in rotation and 26 years old proves that Miller is not washed up. Wakefield will be 46 and management retention of him is a disgrace to the integrity of the competition.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from carnie. Show carnie's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]I feel entirely confident the Sox will sweep tomorows double header, I base this off disregarding the facts.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]I'm all for disregarding the facts.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]Road record and less than full commitment in rotation and 26 years old proves that Miller is not washed up. Wakefield will be 46 and management retention of him is a disgrace to the integrity of the competition.
    Posted by 1958lesspaul[/QUOTE]

    What?

    The integrity of this competion?

    Wake   5.08  1.327
    Dice     5.30  1.473
    Miller   5.63  1.828
    Lackey 6.49 1.630
    Douby  6.75  2.143
    Taz        6.75  2.250
    Weiland 7.99 1.732
    Wally     9.99  3.000

    If we had anyone better, I'd hand Wake his plane ticket myself.
    You are in La La land if you think sub 5.00 ERApitchers grow on trees.
    Our farm system is low on ML ready starting pitchers.
    Even Weiland was not ready.
    Doubront was hurt- you still don't get that one.
    Miller has potential and is better than Lackey.
    Even if you put Miller ahead of Wake, Wake is still the 5th best option we have.  
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from walterjohnson07. Show walterjohnson07's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Time to move on.  Enough already.  It was painful and costly waiting for win #200.  If Wake comes back next year he'll be worse.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from athens7676. Show athens7676's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    I would not extend Wake... The Sox need to save as much $$$ as they can to extend Ellsbury...the best player on the team.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from redsoxfanmoncton. Show redsoxfanmoncton's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]Do you extend Wakefield to 2012?
    Posted by 1958lesspaul[/QUOTE]
    yes, extend him an invitation to play elsewhere, but he must take Lackey, Crawford, Ortiz with him, 
    BTW, Theo and Francona, are throw ins for the deal
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 8redsox8. Show 8redsox8's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    I think that today's start will go a long way toward determining whether or not the Red Sox will even entertain the idea of bringing Wake back for another year.  Pitch well in an extremely key game and the Sox win, they may just bring him back again.  I hope not.  Just think about the fact that if he had pitched well in only one third of the starts that it took to get his 200th win and won only two of those games, the playoff spot would be clinched by now and maybe this conversation is delayed at least until the off season.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from mick711. Show mick711's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    resigning wakefield should be at the top of the club's agenda. 5 years, i think, is appropriate. wake has earned it!!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from itllnevahapn. Show itllnevahapn's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]Move on to what? Dice-K? Lackey? Miller? Weiland? Our budget is crippled by the CC and lackey signings. We can't afford 2-3 better starters via Free agency, unless we open holes at DH, Closer, SS, and elsewhere. Next year, we can only hope Lester, Beckett and Buch stay healthy. Without anyone better within the system, keeping Wake for about $1M to be an insurance policy is the right thing to do. The 200 win fiasco is past. Next year, we should know to use Wake for only 15 starts or so.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]


    we have ingelsia at ss next year, i bet weiland rebounds, if the use him to have an era round 4.5 as our 4th starter. we have a farm system. time to use it.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    The Wakefield loyalists have an agenda. They want to see Wake become the Sox all time wins leader. 
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jamesey271975. Show jamesey271975's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]The Wakefield loyalists have an agenda. They want to see Wake become the Sox all time wins leader. 
    Posted by dgalehouse[/QUOTE]

    Given hes 6 wins behind Clemens we'd need him to play about 5 more seasons.

    Luckily in terms of being the all time Loser leader Wake took care of that a few years ago, hes got 167 and the next guy has 112. Thats right about 50% more Losses than anyone else. What a great servant. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dgalehouse. Show dgalehouse's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012? : Given hes 6 wins behind Clemens we'd need him to play about 5 more seasons. Luckily in terms of being the all time Loser leader Wake took care of that a few years ago, hes got 167 and the next guy has 112. Thats right about 50% more Losses than anyone else. What a great servant. 
    Posted by jamesey271975[/QUOTE]
    Yeah , but he eats 50 % more innings. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Rebuild this team.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 1958lesspaul. Show 1958lesspaul's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Wake 5.08 1.327

    Over 2.5 years. The other pitchers are young with small samples and not allowed a regular rotation spot schedule. Miller is good on the road and the team is 9-3 when he starts.

    70% want Wakefield gone. In this case, they are correct.

    One decent start should have no bearing on a 46 year old pitcher with an ERA over 5 for over 2.5 years.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BosoxJoe5. Show BosoxJoe5's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    On an very interesting note Wakefield should have the avantage against Softy 2009 FA dream pitcher Burnett. If the Yankees can win the division with Burnett, I think the Red Sox are fine with Wakefield.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from summerof67. Show summerof67's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Wakes has been one of our healthiest and, from that physical standpoint, most dependable starters. And you can see the desire in his eyes.

    Yes, as moon points out, his WHIP is respectable and there were at lewst two or three games in the early season where he had zero run support.  So his record could have been 15-7 at this point.

    Give him a chance.  He still has it, IMO.  Whatever that is.

    Wish it were contagious so he could give it to the rest of the staff.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from War-Eagle. Show War-Eagle's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    I have been thinking for a few years now that Wake is not being properly used, if its agreeable to him I would bring him back but not as a started but middle relief, the opposing batters would be having fits, after seeing a non knuckleball picther, then Wake, followed by your closer. I believe the the timing of the opposing batters would be so screwed up not only from going from a non knuckle ball pitcher but then to a knuckle ball and then back again. So the answer to the question is both Yes if he agrees to his role and NO if he doesn't, Wake has always been a team player so I believe he would agree.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Wake 5.08 1.327

    Over 2.5 years. The other pitchers are young with small samples and not allowed a regular rotation spot schedule. Miller is good on the road and the team is 9-3 when he starts.

    1) Wake was not afforded a "regular roation spot" for most of the time frame you mention (mid 2009-present). You continously spot statements that are just plain false.
    2009: Wake missed action from July 9th to his start on Aug 26th. He then had 10 days off before his next start, 16 days to his following start, then 9 before his last start.
    2010: 4 starts followed by pen duty.  1 start, then pen duty. 11 starts (some with staggered amounts of off days), 10 days off, pen duty, one start, pen duty, one start, pen duty, and finally one more start to end the season. He was jerked from starter to relief a staggering 10 times in 2010. There's nothing regular about that.
    2011: Mop up duty until May 1st, the one start, 3 days later a relief appearance, then a start 2 days later, relief 5 days later, then a start 11 days later (11 days of no action!). He then started "regularly" for 17 starts. WOW! Then pen duty followed by 3 starts. The reason he stayed a starter for 17 straight games was because of injuries 2 or more of our other starters and the fact that he allowed 3 or less runs in 9 of the first 14 of them (plus a 4 ER in 6 IP game). Like it or not, he stayed in the rotation because he was performing well for a 6th starter.

    Bottomline: while Wake has been more "regular" than Miller and Weilandin MLB, they were starters in AAA on a regular basis. They were not jerked from relief to starter, given 10 days off or more for non-injury related issues, or given a catcher that can't catch their strikes.

    2) Lackey is not young, but I guess you prefer him over Wake due to his lower age and belt size. Dice-K is not young and has been injured almoste every season. He won't be available to start next year.  Bedard is better than Wake, but barely can pitch and will be a FA this winter. As for the young pitchers:

    Miller: had 13, 20, and 14 starts from 2007 to 2009. That's three chances to stick on as a starter. He had 7 starts last year and an 8.54 ERA. This year he has had 12 starts in MLB and 12 at Pawtucket. That's about equal to Wake, but without being jerked to relief and back 4 times. If you combine is minor and major league starts per season he has this record of GS'd:
          Majors         Minors
    07     0 (8 relief)  13 (no relief)
    08   13 (0)           4 (+2 relief)
    09    20 (9)          7 (no relief)
    10    7  (2)          12 (no relief)
    11    12 (4)         12 (1 relief)

    Total Miller starts since 2009:        27, 19, 24. (+16 games in relief)
    Total Wake starts from mid 2009:    4, 19, 22 (+19 relief games)
    Miller has had a more "regular starting rotaion" role than Wake since mid 2009.

    Weiland: 24 years old, but was not ready to pitch in the bigs this year. The only reason he was here was because we had 3 or 4 starters out at the same time. He has 29 starts this year in MLB and AAA...more than Wake. He had 25 last year with Portland. He was in single A in 2009 with 26 starts.

    Doubront: 23 years old. I thought he might be MLB ready this year, but he was injured and has been slow to recover fully. I know you want to deny he was hurt when you called for him to start over Wake, but the DL prevents pitchers from pitching. He had 16 starts and 2 relief games in AAA this year (2-5 4.22 ERA).

    Others: There are none.

    3) You keep coming up with new supposed fact that show others are better than Wake, and you have been continually proven wrong. All you have left is Road ERA and 2011 team record in Miller's starts. If you go by those numbers with Wake, he has a 4.99 ERA and the team is 12-10 in his starts. Those may be worse than Miller, but they are very capable numbers for 6/7 starter on any MLB team.


    70% want Wakefield gone. In this case, they are correct. 

    I can't believe you are using this site's poster's opinions to try and back up your position. You have continually said the site is full of idiots. How can so many "idiots" all be right at the same time all of a sudden? Is it "voodoo"?

    One decent start should have no bearing on a 46 year old pitcher with an ERA over 5 for over 2.5 years.

    I agree. Even a no hitter should not make any difference, as would a 2 Ip 7 ER game.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]I have been thinking for a few years now that Wake is not being properly used, if its agreeable to him I would bring him back but not as a started but middle relief, the opposing batters would be having fits, after seeing a non knuckleball picther, then Wake, followed by your closer. I believe the the timing of the opposing batters would be so screwed up not only from going from a non knuckle ball pitcher but then to a knuckle ball and then back again. So the answer to the question is both Yes if he agrees to his role and NO if he doesn't, Wake has always been a team player so I believe he would agree.
    Posted by War-Eagle[/QUOTE]

    It may very well be the best role for Wake. I also think he would do fine if he was given 7-9 starts in April followed by light relief duty or a DL stint, and then maybe 7-9 more starts from mid July to Sept 1st. I do not think he is capable of pitching 20-30 straight starts. I said that to start this year. However, that doesn't mean he has no value as a 6/7 starter.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from traven. Show traven's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    The only possible reason to extend Wake is to give this board a topic to vent on next year.  There are absolutely NO positives that come out of such a move.  Time to move and and get younger.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from jamesey271975. Show jamesey271975's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]Wakes has been one of our healthiest and, from that physical standpoint, most dependable starters. And you can see the desire in his eyes. Yes, as moon points out, his WHIP is respectable and there were at lewst two or three games in the early season where he had zero run support.  So his record could have been 15-7 at this point. Give him a chance.  He still has it, IMO.  Whatever that is. Wish it were contagious so he could give it to the rest of the staff.
    Posted by summerof67[/QUOTE]

    Are you for real?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share