Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from georom4. Show georom4's posts

    Re: Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

    the old man has been pitching decently...no need for the hate  obviously next year might be a different story if clay gets back healthy and we pick up a starter at deadline
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from tetonman50. Show tetonman50's posts

    Re: Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

    In Response to Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?:
    [QUOTE]I respect Wakefield and what he's accomplished over his long career, but he's a middle-aged knuckleball pitcher who can rarely be trusted for more than five or six innings. Are there really no better options out there? Should Wake be in a Red Sox uniform in 2012?
    Posted by davetheknave[/QUOTE]
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tetonman50. Show tetonman50's posts

    Re: Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

    Wakefield's pitcing has been far more consistent than our line up.....
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

    Wake's 14 starts in 2011...as a 6th starter:

    Wake is 6-4 and the team is 9-5 in his starts. He was our 6th starter to start the year, and silly clown here thinks a 6th starter going 9-5 is the single biggest weakness of our team, and that he shouldhave retired 3 years ago, 2 years ago, 1 year ago, this
     spring and now.

    Here they are:

                      IP  H  ER BB (comments)
    1) vs Sea  5.2  3  1  1  
    (left with 2 outs and man on 1st: Jenks allowed his runner to score plus 1 more and Wake gets no decision: Sox win anyways)

    2) vs Min  4.1  9  6  4 (started 5 days earlier/pitched relief 2 days before)
    (scored 2 runs on BB, IF hit, GB single and Balk)

    3) vs Cubs  6  7  4  1
     (shut out through 6.2, then two dbls = 1 run)

    4) @ Det   7   5  2  2
     (1 run scores on seeing eye GB single, SB and another seeing eye GB single.)

    5) vs CWS  6  7  4  1
     (shut out through 4.2, then BB, bloop single, SB, Groundout to SS, Gb double down 3B line that could have been fielded by Youk)

    6) @ NYY   5.1  5  5  3
     (Shutout through 4 IP, then 3 runs on BB, PB, 1B, 2B, GB -man to 3rd-Sac Fly, then in 6th 2 outs and BB, and Aceves comes in and allows his run to score.)

    7) @ TB     7   4  1  5
     (Shut out for 4.1 IP then HR, in 6th BB, PB, BB, GB runners advance and Passed Ball allows run to score.)

    8) vs Mil   8   3 2  1
     (2-runo HR in 2nd + solo HR in 7th: no bad luck)

    9) @ Pitt   6   7  5  4
     (shut out for 4.1 IP, and 1B, SB, BB, HR, 2B, GB single for 3 runs, 4th run scores on cheap single to 3B -Youk muffs it, and a 2B to CF that Ellsbury misjudged-could have been caught, then a GB to 2B.)

    10) @ Hou  5.1  11  5  0
     (1st inning: 1B, SB, GB runner to 3B, Sac Fly, 2 runs score in 2nd on 2B, 1B, bunt 1B to 3B, and 2B, in the 5th: GB single, WP, 2B)
     
    11) vs Tor    7    9  3  1
     (3rd inning: swinging bunt single, 1B, GB runners advance, Sac Fly, long 1B)

    12) @ Bal    4.2  9  3  2
     (1st: 2 outs then weak 1B to 3B, hard 1B, then 3B for 2 runs. 5th: 2 Ks, HR, HR, 1B, bloop 1B-could have been caught, BB, 2B clears bases)

    13) vs Sea  6.1  10  7  1
     (1st: HBP & HR, 5th: K, BB, seeing eye GB 1B, 2B scores 1, Wake enters the 7th ahead 11-3. He could have been relieved, but he stays in and allows: 4 runs on 3 singles and HR)

    14) @ CWS  7.0  3  3  2
     (Shut out for 5 IP, then IF single -bunt- Sacrifice, WP -passed ball?- Sac Fly: not really a blight on Wake here. Then, in the 7th: BB on full count and solid HR.)

    In short, 
    left 1st game after 5.2w. 0 ERs.
    3rd game:had shut out for 6.2 IP
    4th game: 7 IP 2 ERs
    5th game: 4.2 IP shutout then 2 cheap runs in the 5th.
    6th game: shut out for 4 IP.
    7th game: 4.1 Ip shuout, then HR and a cheap run.
    8th game: 8 IP 2 ERs
    9th game: shut out for 4 IP, then some cheap runs.
    11th game: 7 IP 3 ER (one was cheap)
    13th game: 6 IP 3 ERs, then the 4 runs in the 7th.
    14th game: shut out for 5 IP, 1 ER for 6 IP (cheap), then 2 run HR in 7th.

    11 of 14 games he has kept us in it to about 5 IP or more. 
    He will likely be signed for about $2M/yr if he wants to return.
    It's sill to even question this.
    Only clowns will.

    Wake has kept this team in the game early. He has allowed more than his fair share of cheap runs. Relievers have allowed more of his runners to score as a percent, than any other starter on this team. He has been left in too long a few times. Yes, he has let up more than his share of HRs, but he has done a...

     GREAT JOB FOR a 6th STARTER!. 
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Diamondtalk. Show Diamondtalk's posts

    Re: Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

    No question about it.    Wakefield will be back.   He works cheap and somehow there's always a need for him when somebody goes down.
     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Do you want Tim Wakefield back next year?

    No! Time for tim to go bye bye
     

Share