Re: I still like Garza in our rotation
posted at 6/25/2013 6:33 PM EDT
I don't think the OP or the thread is about Garza at all.
I don't think you know much about anything.
They are just a mechanism for once again lambasting the Red Sox.
Who is lambasting any Sox players here?
Thus all the comments about how lousy the current rotation is--pretty amazing
Yes, Lester must amaze you and only you. (No, that is not lambasting Jon.)
, when you think about it, he didn't dump all over Buchholz.
I see no need to "think about it".
Also a good thing Garza doesn't go to bat more often, or craze4sox would be telling us how he could--on those off days when he isn't pitching--fill in for Napoli at 1B or wherever.
Or, fill in for you on your 365 "off days".
Garza was pretty good when he pitched for Tampa, but they let him go for a reason.
Yeah, they couildn't afford even his arb raises. They got a hefty return for his value as well, but you must have missed that while slobbering over our great players.
His latest outing was terrific, but against Houston, the dregs of the AL.
You love those one game sample sizes, but ignore Lester's 5 game sample size. Got it.
His ERA has steadily risen since he got to Chicago, and his health has declined. 104 innings in 2012, and the jury is still out in 2013.
It was steadily rising in TB too, then dropped off his first year in Chicago. Using your clown logic, that means it will drop off his first year here too. Then he walks before it goes up.
Plus, as southpaw777 and others have pointed out, Theo Epstein ain't going to be giving away any freebies.
Nobody said he was free.
Garza is going to cost too much.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
May I also say I think Doubront for Garza would be just plain dumb. Doubront throws good stuff and his control is better than Buchholz's at the same age.
Ummm, Buch never walked more than 3.5 per 9 IP after he turned 24. How is 4.1 better than 3.5 (age 23), or 4.0 better than 3.5 (age 24)?
Age Buch Doub
22 4.0** 3.6 **
23 4.9* 7.0**
24 3.5* 4.0
25 3.5 4.1*
26 3.4* x
27 3.0 x
28 3.1* x
* small sample size (under 92 IP)
** tiny sample size (under 25 IP)
Get your facts straight, and stop using this Garza thread to lambast Buchholtz. We know your true motives, clown troll.