Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from tc25. Show tc25's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]While I think Moon has some valid points about Wakefield, He will be another year older next year, and eventually it isn't there anymore. I would try to fill that spot with someone younger. I'd love someone younger and or better, but good pitchers are not cheap. If our budget allows us to get 2-3 solid starters this winter, then fine... adios Tim. I just don't see that happening, so I'd like to have Wake in the wings in case Douby and Weiland don't pan out. If a kid looks good in ST or AAA, bring him up and sit Wake down or find a phantom DL for him. This is such a minor issue we are talking about. Think about it: we are spending all this time discussing next year's 7th starter.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]
    The problem with Wake is our manager doesn't know how to use him out of the pen. That could really tax out pen next year, that is the main reason why Wake should retire.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    [QUOTE]Yes,   for somewhere around 1.25 million, however he is probably a spot starter at best and insurance for injuries to the presumptive front 5 and as previously stated 15 starts at most otherwise we are probably in injury trouble again.  The 5 starters will include: 1. Beckett 2. Lester, 3. Buchholz 4. Lackey 5. Dubront, Bedard, Tazawa, Miller, Weiland, or a free agent pickup 6. Wake
    Posted by william93063[/QUOTE]

    I might consider Wake as the 12th man on a 12-man staff, piching mop-up duty until the need arises for a spot starter. He had a nice stretch where he was pitching well. Salty had on-and-off problems all year  with Wake but it seemed to get worse late in the year when it came to stopping the balls that dropped in the dirt. (For example, he made a Gedman-like backhanded stab at one of the wild pitches yesterday instead of moving his body in front of it to block it. So I'm wondering how much it has affected Wake from trying to keep the knuckler down.

    Anyway, the main reason I responded to your post is that the only guy I'd consider for the No. 5 spot is Bedard. Unless Miller goes to instructional league over the winter and really works on his delivery to get hit consistent and comes back in the spring as a dominating lefty with heat, I'd move on. Weiland and Doubront need to go back to Triple-A for more work.

    I'm hoping Miller is a late bloomer like tall lefties often are.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaffyDan. Show DaffyDan's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    If Wake is not extended and not picked up by anyone else, what's to stop the Sox from signing him WHEN a 7th starter is needed?

    Or sign him to a minor league deal and let him pitch only in home games in Pawtucket on home games until he is needed by the big club?

    There are probably a couple of other scenarios that don't involve carrying him on the active roster. 

    -Daf. 
     
  4. 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]If Wake is not extended and not picked up by anyone else, what's to stop the Sox from signing him WHEN a 7th starter is needed? Or sign him to a minor league deal and let him pitch only in home games in Pawtucket on home games until he is needed by the big club? There are probably a couple of other scenarios that don't involve carrying him on the active roster.  -Daf. 
    Posted by DaffyDan[/QUOTE]

    True, but if he signs elsewhere, and we need a 7th starter mid-season, we'll have to give top prospects to get one. I'll take Wake at about $1M over losing prospects like we did for Bedard.

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

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

     ...stolen bases are another problem when he is pitching...

    Not this year. Wake has one of the best rates of CS against him of any Sox starter.  (12 SB/9CS)
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tompitt. Show tompitt's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    No.    (New blood needed; why waste "innings" on a 6+ era old man (who also does not field his position, ground balls, bunts, backing up) when you can be training a young arm that.  His officia era also does not relfect the damage he does while pitcijg, because the catcher takes error blame for virtually un.catchable knuckle balls that result in runs not counted as earned).  He's had his career, now give him his retirement day.   
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from trouts. Show trouts's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

     Although based on what I saw brought up this year, I have my doubts, there's got to be somebody decent in the farm system who deserves a chance.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012? : I might consider Wake as the 12th man on a 12-man staff, piching mop-up duty until the need arises for a spot starter. He had a nice stretch where he was pitching well. Salty had on-and-off problems all year  with Wake but it seemed to get worse late in the year when it came to stopping the balls that dropped in the dirt. (For example, he made a Gedman-like backhanded stab at one of the wild pitches yesterday instead of moving his body in front of it to block it. So I'm wondering how much it has affected Wake from trying to keep the knuckler down. Anyway, the main reason I responded to your post is that the only guy I'd consider for the No. 5 spot is Bedard. Unless Miller goes to instructional league over the winter and really works on his delivery to get hit consistent and comes back in the spring as a dominating lefty with heat, I'd move on. Weiland and Doubront need to go back to Triple-A for more work. I'm hoping Miller is a late bloomer like tall lefties often are.
    Posted by royf19
    Couple of thoughts.

    One I have mentioned before. Epstein questioned the team's pitching depth in late February because he did not 10 identifiable guys who could start games at the MLB level. Wake won't be the 11th guy next year either.

    Now not having flexibility on your 25 man roster when you sign Wake is an issue but if is far out weighed by the lack of depth come November team building for 2012 IMHO.

    I don't think Wake's being high in the zone has to do with catcher. First Wake has never proclaimed to have that much control over the pitch. But further since there are not 4 base passed balls it would be an unwise choice.

    The back hand catches are not unusual with Wake. Almost every catcher who has ever caught Wake does so side saddle to increase their ability to use the glove hand because the movement is so late.

    More HRs per IP and more PB. Ummm, sounds like as much a Wake problem as it is that he is nasty to catch and this catcher is being exposed.  
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    I think the PBs are over-stated.  Last year, VMart had few PB's, but anybody could steal at any time.  This year, Salty has a ton of PBs, but a very good CS%.   Either way, the result is the same.

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

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    In Response to Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?:
    I think the PBs are over-stated.  Last year, VMart had few PB's, but anybody could steal at any time.  This year, Salty has a ton of PBs, but a very good CS%.   Either way, the result is the same.
    Posted by slomag
    I agree that Salty probably has contained the running fgame as well anybody who has ever caught Wake. But giving VMart his due, he may have caught the knuckleball better than any other catcher. Victor may not call the best game, may not be the best at framing pitches but he has good hands and reactions.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    No.    (New blood needed; why waste "innings" on a 6+ era old man (who also does not field his position, ground balls, bunts, backing up) when you can be training a young arm that.  His officia era also does not relfect the damage he does while pitcijg, because the catcher takes error blame for virtually un.catchable knuckle balls that result in runs not counted as earned).  He's had his career, now give him his retirement day.  

    His ERA is 5.12 and actually should be lower not higher. He has had more inherited runners allowed to score than any other Sox starter. The Opps have scored more runs on bunt hits and sac flies than I have ever seen in all my days, and it's not because Wake can't field. He is actually still an above average fielder.

    Yes, the PBs are part of the package and shouldn't be totally blamed on the catcher, but others have done much better, so it is equally hard o place all the blame on a pitcher who has such nasty stuff that it makes it equally hard to catch as hit. Many of the PBs are strikes. To me, that's on the catcher. If VMart was catching Wake, his ERA might be 4.50 and he might have 3-4 more wins. The fact that he isn't here, doesn't mean it's all Wake's fault.

    There has been so much misinformation put out vs Wake, led by the silly clown, but repeated by many others.

    Wake has the lowest BB/9 rate of any starter from 2010-2011 combined. That's not a sign of wildness.

    Runners have been thrown out in 9 of 21 SB attempts this year, yet many here act like players are stealing at will vs him...THEY AREN'T!

    He has let up a lot of HRs, but other than that, a large percent of his runs allowed are cheap. Infield hits, bunt hits, FCs, Sacs, misjudged balls by OF'er ruled hits, bobbled balls by IF'ers ruled as hits, and the bunt hit last night was Vtek's not Wake's fault.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    One I have mentioned before. Epstein questioned the team's pitching depth in late February because he did not 10 identifiable guys who could start games at the MLB level. Wake won't be the 11th guy next year either. 

    Excellent point katz. I've been talking Wake up as the possible 6/7 guy next year, but the fact is we will likely need or want to have 10 starters next spring. So far, this is how we stack up...

    1) Beckett (Has had injury or performance issues about half of his seasons in MLB) 
    2) Lester (A cancer survivor that has been eratic of late.)
    3) Buchholtz (Young but with a back problem- an injury that is known to reoccur.)
    4) Dice-K (Will be lucky to be back in form by next August.)
    5) Lackey (If he repeats 2011 next year, he will be benched by late June.)
    6) Miller (Has a $3M team option. If he's worth this, Wake is worth $1.5M)
    7) Weiland (Has potential, but has a 7.99 ERA in 5 starts-not really encouraging)
    8) Doubront (Has a 4,84 ERA in 35 MLB IP. He has ML potential, but a gamble.)
    9) Bowden (I guess he could be converted back to a starter, but...)

    Who's number 10?
    Bedard is a FA.
    Tazawa is a FA.

    I look at this list and see Wake as being an equal or better option than everyone from slot 4-9. He's cheaper than a few. 

    Look at the cost of obtaining pitchers this trade deadline. Many weren't even that good, but the cost was high. 

    Let's assume Theo gets Buehrle and a guy like Bedard (let's say Bedard). I'd still prefer this depth chart:
    1) Beck
    2) Lest
    3) Buch
    4) Buehrle
    5) Bedard
    6) Lack
    7) Dice (Aug>)
    8) Wake for $1.5M over Miller at $3M
    9) Doubront
    10) Weiland

    Even if we keep Miller, I'd prefer Wake at #9 than Douby or Weiland. Doubront can be used in the pen if he looks sharp next year.

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

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    it's not because Wake can't field. He is actually still an above average fielder.


    All readers take a read on this line. Aside from every excuse in the book for why hard luck Timmy isn't better, the above line should give the reader a little dose of reality on how absurd the resign Wakefield needed value minority is. Lead by this nut case, of course.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you Extend Wakefield to 2012?

    Iv'e heard several anouncers say it as well. I wouldn't argue if someone said he was average, but Wake is a good fielder. Just as Jeter is one of the worst fielding SSs in MLB. 
     

Share