Gee

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

    Gee

    Do ya think not re-signing Wake is now coming back to bite these guys? He was our only consistent and reliable starter. But Ben knew better.

    I'll bet there are many on this board who were glad to see him go, would love to see him back in the rotation about now.
     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Gee

    Never should have let him go.  Would have been useful to have him this weekend, eh?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from ChronicNYY13. Show ChronicNYY13's posts

    Re: Gee

    The ongoing deal he had given the Sox was very friendly and I would have kept him even if it was for mop up relief.  
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from slicksteve38. Show slicksteve38's posts

    Re: Gee

    Why not trade all the bloated contracts you can to the "contenders" for a bag of balls, and play all the young kids? Give the players that actually want to play ball a chance...I wasnt big on playing Iglesias this early, but at this point, who cares?
    If you can trade Youk and Beckett, that would be a good start...time to inject more youth and energy into this team. i loved watching Middlebrooks play this weekend.
    On another note, have you noticed how Byrd busts his backside on every play? That guy wants to play...I have a very hard time rooting for this team.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Gee

    Wakefield never pitched as bad as Buchholz has.
    How much longer are they going to let this guy go out there and blow up? It's not going to get any better.The RS could use Wake to steady the ship. Ben needs to give him a call, and it's not like he would need much time to get ready to throw knuckleballs!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Gee

    Wasn't there some poster here last year who said no pitcher should remain in the rotation with a 5+ ERA?

    Buch  9.09
    Doub  5.19 (4.99 career)

    ...with Lester and Beckett just a 3-run HR away from 5+ as well.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Gee

    "Wakelfield never pitched as bad as Buchholz has."

    Yes he did.

    Many times.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from slicksteve38. Show slicksteve38's posts

    Re: Gee

    Wakefield basically pitched as bad as Bucholz is now for the past two years....where have you been?
    Wake isnt the answer.  The answer is blowing up the team for the year and playing a bunch of the young kids to see if they are worth keeping.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from DirtyWaterLover. Show DirtyWaterLover's posts

    Re: Gee

    Wake?  Consistent?  Reliable?

    Wake was anything but consistent.  His claim to fame was that he ate up innings. 
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Gee

    In Response to Re: Gee:
    [QUOTE]"Wakelfield never pitched as bad as Buchholz has." Yes he did. Many times.
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    Really? Name a time when Wake gave up 5 or more runs in 6 consecutive starts.
    I'm waiting.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Gee

    In Response to Re: Gee:
    [QUOTE]Wake?  Consistent?  Reliable? Wake was anything but consistent.  His claim to fame was that he ate up innings. 
    Posted by DirtyWaterLover[/QUOTE]


    He averaged 11 wins a season in his 17 years with the Sox. He won 200 games in his career. All you can remember is his quest for win number 200, which took him 7 starts, and in which 4 of those were blown wins by the defense and BP.

    If you don't think Wake was consistent and reliable, you are clueless!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ZILLAGOD. Show ZILLAGOD's posts

    Re: Gee

    In Response to Re: Gee:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gee : Really? Name a time when Wake gave up 5 or more runs in 6 consecutive starts. I'm waiting.
    Posted by harv53[/QUOTE]

    So Buchholz is a dud because he is struggling?

    Wakefiled had his day, at times he was a big plus.

    But when he stunk , he really stunk. Does 6 homeruns in a game ring a bell?...luckiliy his team bailed him out, by offering run support.

    I'm not hating Wakefield, but please Buchholz is allowed to have a bad stretch, isn't he?...or have we become totally unforgiving and we trade every player as soon as they have some struggles?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Gee

    Do ya think not re-signing Wake is now coming back to bite these guys? He was our only consistent and reliable starter

    Wastefield was very consistently horrible!

    There was a poster who said that no man with an ERA over 5 for 3 years had any business in the rotation.

    There was a poster who said to offer Wastefield 2 million, then dropped it to 1 million, then dropped it to $750,000. Of course, there was no market for Tim Wastefield.

    Doubrant looks like Koufax, compared to goofball Wastefield.

    Invest in the youth, and don't use a few starts as a sample size.

    The problem is the offense. Last night, the offense scored 3 earned runs against a pitiful Kansas City team.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from antibody. Show antibody's posts

    Re: Gee

    Short memories here. How many losses did the team take in the last half of  last season trying to get him to 200 wins? Too many. Don't get me wrong, I love Wake and appreciate all that he did through the years, but it was time for him to go. Really, if Wake was here this season, does anyone truly believe all would be O.K. with this team? If you do you're grasping at some very brittle straws.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from harv53. Show harv53's posts

    Re: Gee

    In Response to Re: Gee:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gee : So Buchholz is a dud because he is struggling? Wakefiled had his day, at times he was a big plus. But when he stunk , he really stunk. Does 6 homeruns in a game ring a bell?...luckiliy his team bailed him out, by offering run support. I'm not hating Wakefield, but please Buchholz is allowed to have a bad stretch, isn't he?...or have we become totally unforgiving and we trade every player as soon as they have some struggles?
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]

    A bad stretch? yes. But you'd also expect some quality starts mixed in there.
    To be completely candid, I never thought he was anything close to what he was touted as. In his brief career, he has raely managed to get past the 5th inning and has terrible command of his FB. His K/BB ratio is medicore.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliamsjr. Show hankwilliamsjr's posts

    Re: Gee

    Short memories here. How many losses did the team take in the last half of  last season trying to get him to 200 wins? Too many

    Correct, and naming Tim Wastefield as the way to improve pitching is like saying gasoline will help put out a forest fire.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Gee

    In Response to Re: Gee:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Gee : So Buchholz is a dud because he is struggling? Wakefiled had his day, at times he was a big plus. But when he stunk , he really stunk. Does 6 homeruns in a game ring a bell?...luckiliy his team bailed him out, by offering run support. I'm not hating Wakefield, but please Buchholz is allowed to have a bad stretch, isn't he?...or have we become totally unforgiving and we trade every player as soon as they have some struggles?
    Posted by ZILLAGOD[/QUOTE]
    Buchholz has been awful.  Really really awful.  Doesn't mean he is always going to suck or that he was never actually good to begin with.  But let's not understate things by saying he is "struggling."  He is epically stinking it up in historic proportion.  Hopefully he gets back on track, because he can be a very good pitcher.  

    As much as I loved Wake, it was time for him to retire.  We have other, younger pitchers who should be able to do what he did and with higher upside.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from RedSox_Giants_Devils_Nicks. Show RedSox_Giants_Devils_Nicks's posts

    Re: Gee

    I thought you were going to recommend we try to trade with the Mets for Dillon Gee
     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Gee

    Wake? No.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from EnchiladaT. Show EnchiladaT's posts

    Re: Gee

    Wake? Omg really now?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Gee

    I thought this thread was going to be about the revered local sports writer, Michael Gee.
    http://jmgee.blogspot.com/2012/04/if-you-cant-feel-good-on-opening-day.html
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from dannycater. Show dannycater's posts

    Re: Gee

    I don't think it's as much Wakefield himself, but a veteran pitcher like him (few were/are) who could make a stopper start of 7 or 8 or even 9, or throw some brilliant stretches of work that helped the team out of a slide. He did that quite a bit over the years. Burgmeier did that in his few years with Sox, came in relief to shut the door for long innings, or could spot start. But between 1995 to 2011, he was a safety valve/net/charm whatever. He was there when the team needed someone to step up. Tiant was the ultimate stopper. There is no one even close to Wakefield or Tiant on the current roster. Lester has shown not to be a guy who can be a stopper, unfortunately. Beckett was for a while, and Buchholz has fallen off the map. I guess Padilla could be a new Wakefield, but doubtful. Add in the bullpen woes (although much better than early in year) and it's becoming painful to watch.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share