Lackey now over.500

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

    Re: Lackey now at.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500 : I agree it's a lack of focus but with Lackey it tends to start early and often, regardless of the lead.  Schil is a HOF'r for obvious reasons, especially his ability to focus throughout a big game.  Curt's lapses normally came after pitching brilliantly with very few hits/runs given up.  Curt also had the ability to recover quickly and in most cases pitch deep into the game, not just 5 plus innings on an average like John.  Lackey is a very hittable pitcher "much like Buehrle" neither have great stuff and usually need help to get through a game.  I would take Schill in a big game anytime but never put that kind of trust in John. 
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    I wasn't comparing Lackey's skill-set to that of Schilling's. No way.
    Just the "letting up" factor. Schill let bottom-of-the-order pesky hitters get to him.

    Lackey was signed for pitching depth. Schill was signed as a top-of-the-rotation pitcher. Expectations for Lackey are unrealistic and intertwined with his FA salary.
    Hence, any analogy is self-defeating unless it's made using a similar monetary perimeter.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    Lackey now 7-3 since coming off the DL.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]Lackey now 7-3 since coming off the DL.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    John has averaged:

    5.2 innings pitched in those 10 games
    3.4 runs in 5 innings
    7 hits in 5 innings 

    Last night he was pulled after 5.2 after struggling every other inning and giving up 11 hits.

    You can make a pitch for a 7 and 3 record, or just simply admit little has changed.  Johns pitching deserves credit for "maybe" three of those wins, four would be stretching it.  This can also be said of Miller
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    Keep up the Lackey bashing.  It is working well getting the Sox wins.  To simply quote stats takes things out of context.  Lackey gave up 2 earned in the first and then settled down after that.  The Sox took that time to get it together and grab a big lead.  At that point, You need the pitcher to throw strikes and not walk anyone.  Since he got touched up for a homerun in that process, you all take the opportunity to say he gave up x runs in x innings.  Without knowing the situation, your stat quotes mean nothing.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from jimdavis. Show jimdavis's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500 : Jim, harness is all about Stats, but usually only when it works to his advantage.  I hope we win every game with Lackey on the mound that won't change the facts and I certainly won't try and sugar coat his Stats. I'm not sure you watched the game last night but Lackey gave up 3 first inning runs and was in trouble every other inning until taken out.  I agree a win is a win but at least give the credit where credit is due.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    I didn't see inning 1 but I thought an error made it 2 earned runs.  I did see him in a bit of trouble after that.  His previous few outings were better than last night but I still think he is trending in the right direction.  It seems with him, we evaluate him pitch by pitch.  The last 3 outings are history and last night, he sucks again.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500 : I didn't see inning 1 but I thought an error made it 2 earned runs.  I did see him in a bit of trouble after that.  His previous few outings were better than last night but I still think he is trending in the right direction.  It seems with him, we evaluate him pitch by pitch.  The last 3 outings are history and last night, he sucks again.
    Posted by jimdavis[/QUOTE]


    Jim, I'm just looking at the entire picture and giving my honest opinion.  I don't feel it's right to give credit to a person when he had nothing to do with the win.  Lackey appears to be doing a little better but he still struggles to be consistent.

    If Terry takes a struggling pitcher out after 5 innings and our offense and/or pen holds the lead or improves on it, the only thing Lackey should get partial credit for is being pulled before it was too late.  Hey, the bottom line is we are winning which is great.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from devildavid. Show devildavid's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    craze4sox, I agree with you. Lackey may seem to be improving since his terrible start, but I don't see any significant improvement. He just flat out gives up too many hits. He has never been good in this area, but this season he is horrible. He is way too hittable this season.

    Like you, I'm glad the Sox are winning more when Lackey pitches, but he certainly doesn't deserve much of the credit.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]craze4sox, I agree with you. Lackey may seem to be improving since his terrible start, but I don't see any significant improvement. He just flat out gives up too many hits. He has never been good in this area, but this season he is horrible. He is way too hittable this season. Like you, I'm glad the Sox are winning more when Lackey pitches, but he certainly doesn't deserve much of the credit.
    Posted by devildavid[/QUOTE]

    The two key words are "very hittable" david, last night John could have easily given up more runs but managed to escape.  Miller is similar, Andrew needs to learn how to locate his fastball and control the strike zone better.  I really hope Theo can land another reliable starter before the deadline. 

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from -TheBabe-------------------. Show -TheBabe-------------------'s posts

    Re: Lackey now at.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500 : I wasn't comparing Lackey's skill-set to that of Schilling's. No way. Just the "letting up" factor. Schill let bottom-of-the-order pesky hitters get to him. Lackey was signed for pitching depth. Schill was signed as a top-of-the-rotation pitcher. Expectations for Lackey are unrealistic and intertwined with his FA salary. Hence, any analogy is self-defeating unless it's made using a similar monetary perimeter.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Do you actually believe the drivel you post?

    The sawx did not give lackey that contract for "pitching depth". He was signed to be a front of the rotation starter, which he hasn't been.

    You are unbelievable.

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

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    This article explains Lackey perfectly, along with some "not so good news" on Clay.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/782809-mlb-trade-rumors-clay-buchholz-injury-worsening-red-sox-forced-to-trade
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    I have no doubt the offense can carry this team so long as Beckett and Lester dominate. However only a turkey would think Lackey, Wakefield, and Miller are going to be of much assistance.


     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]I have no doubt the offense can carry this team so long as Beckett and Lester dominate. However only a turkey would think Lackey, Wakefield, and Miller are going to be of much assistance.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    What is the bottom line in baseball? Or any athletic competition?
    W I N N I N G.

    Team record when Miller/Wake/Lackey pitch: 24-13.

    Turkey.


     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Your-Echo. Show Your-Echo's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    Some in the forum think that the bottom line here is entertainment just ask Softlaw, Harness, and Burrito.

    Some think that it is winning - call them shallow.

    Some think that it is effort and attitude.

    Some just enjoy the experience and journey. Color them fans.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    ...and some don't think at all.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from -The-Babe---------------. Show -The-Babe---------------'s posts

    Re: Lackey now at.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500 : Do you actually believe the drivel you post? The sawx did not give lackey that contract for "pitching depth". He was signed to be a front of the rotation starter, which he hasn't been. You are unbelievable.
    Posted by -TheBabe-------------------[/QUOTE]

    Crickets..........

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now at.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now at.500 : Do you actually believe the drivel you post? The sawx did not give lackey that contract for "pitching depth". He was signed to be a front of the rotation starter, which he hasn't been. You are unbelievable.
    Posted by -TheBabe-------------------[/QUOTE]

    Babe, this is currently being addressed on the REALISTIC thread.
    EDIT: You don't think Schilling was signed as a front line starter?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Your-Echo. Show Your-Echo's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    I thought that the realistic thread would ban someone who has been banned two hundred times elsewhere. Are they that hard up? Any port in a storm?
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500 : Jim, I'm just looking at the entire picture and giving my honest opinion.  I don't feel it's right to give credit to a person when he had nothing to do with the win.  Lackey appears to be doing a little better but he still struggles to be consistent. If Terry takes a struggling pitcher out after 5 innings and our offense and/or pen holds the lead or improves on it, the only thing Lackey should get partial credit for is being pulled before it was too late.  Hey, the bottom line is we are winning which is great.
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    You are looking at the entire picture? Honestly?
    Lackey gave up a 3-run dinger in the first, on an 83 mph change-up on the outside black. Sometimes hitters hit good pitches. It happens. It followed an error and a catchable flyball.

    Lackey then shut down the opposition over the next three frames, retiring them in order in the 2nd/3rd. He allowed his team to come back and take a huge 10-3 lead. The rest is academic.

    Meanwhile, Bruce Chen came in at 5-3  3.30 ERA and was tagged for a career-high 10 runs over 4 IP. Now, that might just mean the ball flies out of Fenway in July. This is Chen's 13th season.


    Now, tell me more about "the whole picture you honestly see".
    Tell me how Lackey had "nothing to do with the win..."

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500 : John has averaged: 5.2 innings pitched in those 10 games 3.4 runs in 5 innings 7 hits in 5 innings  Last night he was pulled after 5.2 after struggling every other inning and giving up 11 hits. You can make a pitch for a 7 and 3 record, or just simply admit little has changedJohns pitching deserves credit for "maybe" three of those wins, four would be stretching it.  This can also be said of Miller
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    Lackey in his last 4 starts: 4-0  2.50 ERA.
    Are his last 4 starts relevant? Does he deserve maybe a little credit?
    Do you think you could admit that's a hell of a change!

    Miller is exposed and is regressing. The two are going in different directions.




     
  21. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    Hall should win the batting crown.
     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    Wake began the season in the BP, signed as insurance starter.
    Where is he now, fool? Send Hall Ur love. He can use it after the Dear John...
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: Lackey now over.500

    In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Lackey now over.500 : You are looking at the entire picture ? Honestly ? Lackey gave up a 3-run dinger in the first, on an 83 mph change-up on the outside black . Sometimes hitters hit good pitches. It happens. It followed an error and a catchable flyball. Lackey then shut down the opposition over the next three frames, retiring them in order in the 2nd/3rd. He allowed his team to come back and take a huge 10-3 lead. The rest is academic. Meanwhile, Bruce Chen came in at 5-3  3.30 ERA and was tagged for a career-high 10 runs over 4 IP. Now, that might just mean the ball flies out of Fenway in July. This is Chen's 13th season. Now, tell me more about "the whole picture you honestly see". Tell me how Lackey had " nothing to do with the win..."
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    You are definitely in denial.  Anyone who watched the game saw lackey not only give up 11 in hits in 5 plus innings and in trouble throughout.  The fact You can't even take the "below articles seriously" as proof of how people perceive Lackey speaks volumes.  We would'nt be looking for a solid #3 starter if Theo had confidence in Lackey.  Any pitcher we trade for will probably get the start ahead of Lackey in the PS if Clay is hurt.

    When you find an article or anyone legit to back up your statement, then you may possibly find someone who will listen.  Here is todays link, it doesn't give Lackey and more credit than the first one.

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/771584-red-sox-trade-rumors-latest-news-and-buzz-on-bostons-deadline-deals/entry/111112-red-sox-trade-rumors-erik-bedard-gives-red-sox-insurance-for-clay-buchholz

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/782809-mlb-trade-rumors-clay-buchholz-injury-worsening-red-sox-forced-to-trade
     

Share