Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    Last year I felt the need to defend Lackey's year because the critics were over the top. In 2010, he really was much better than he was given credit for.

    My standard for how good a starting pitcher is isn't based on quality starts. I've always felt that if a SP has an ERA of 3.99 or lower, he had a nice season. So my standard is how many games a SP goes at least 5 IP with an ERA under 4.00. That means he has to go 5 or 6 IP with 2 ERs or less or at least 7 IP with three ER or less.

    In 2010, Lackey had 20 such starts, just two less than Lester so with average run support, he pitched well enough to go 20-13 (based on getting decisions in every start).

    This year, by that same standard, Lackey had just seven such starts, so he pitched well enough to only go 7-21. He did have an 8 IP, 4 ER game and a 6.2 IP, 3 ER game (4.02 ERA), which aren't terrible, but to be consistent, those go down as losses.

    So yes, I'll give him credit for a decent 2010 season. But in 2011, he wasn't just bad, he was horrible.

    By that same standard:

    In 31 starts, Lester should have been 19-11 (he had a 4.0 IP, 0 ER game that I'm assuming was a rain game. It wasn't 5 IP so I can't give him the W but I'm also not going to give him the L.)

    In 30 starts, Beckett should have been 20-8. (He had two games going less than 5 IP with 0 ER. One was a rain game and the other was the ankle sprain game).
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    I have a theory that Lackey is hiding an injury, due to a protection clause in his contract that says if he needs TJ surgery, he has to play an extra year at league minimum salary for the Sox.  He's only 32 and a drop-off like that is hard to explain unless something is physically wrong with him.
     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    In Response to Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was:
    [QUOTE]I have a theory that Lackey is hiding an injury, due to a protection clause in his contract that says if he needs TJ surgery, he has to play an extra year at league minimum salary for the Sox.  He's only 32 and a drop-off like that is hard to explain unless something is physically wrong with him.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]

    Slomag, I agree with both you and Roy and its only going to get worse if we can't get John out of Boston.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    Of course, pitching is a funny game. Who knows? Maybe he works hard in the offseason, comes back in shape and reverts to being the pitcher the was with the Angels.

    My question is this?

    Can or will the fans put this season behind them and give everyone from Lackey to Beckett to Youk to the front office etc a clean slate for next year and give everyone the chance to redeem themselves?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    In Response to Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was:
    [QUOTE]Of course, pitching is a funny game. Who knows? Maybe he works hard in the offseason, comes back in shape and reverts to being the pitcher the was with the Angels. My question is this? Can or will the fans put this season behind them and give everyone from Lackey to Beckett to Youk to the front office etc a clean slate for next year and give everyone the chance to redeem themselves?
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    Anything is possible roy but "as slomag stated" I think Lackey may have arm trouble that has yet to come to a head.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    I think he has a head problem that has gone to his arm.

    Tongue out

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    In Response to Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was:
    [QUOTE]I have a theory that Lackey is hiding an injury, due to a protection clause in his contract that says if he needs TJ surgery, he has to play an extra year at league minimum salary for the Sox.  He's only 32 and a drop-off like that is hard to explain unless something is physically wrong with him.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]
        The first sign of injury is that velocity goes down, and I don't think this has happened to Lackey. Pitching is like real estate, location, location, location.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from hambonawilliams. Show hambonawilliams's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    I'll tell you what was wrong with Lackey...he was fat and drunk...lol...what else do you need to know...FAT AND DRUNK!!!...isn't that enough?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    I think the clause is envoked if at any time during the deal, lackey has elbow issues, so it would be in his best interest to hide such an injury.

    (I'm not saying he did, just that he has incentive to do so.)
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was

    In Response to Re: Here's How Bad Lackey Really Was:
    [QUOTE]I have a theory that Lackey is hiding an injury, due to a protection clause in his contract that says if he needs TJ surgery, he has to play an extra year at league minimum salary for the Sox.  He's only 32 and a drop-off like that is hard to explain unless something is physically wrong with him.
    Posted by slomag[/QUOTE]


    I said similar some time back. And there are key indicators that reflect this line of thought.
     

Share