Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

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

    Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    Is Middlebrooks the next coming of Rob Deer- either HR or strikeouts? He looking more like the next coming of Rob Deer.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to razcreation's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Middlebrooks the next coming of Rob Deer- either HR or strikeouts? He looking more like the next coming of Rob Deer.

    [/QUOTE]

    How about the second coming of Mark Reynolds?

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

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    Let's face it, defence aside, he's got work to do just to be Deer 2 or Reynolds 2.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Let's face it, defence aside, he's got work to do just to be Deer 2 or Reynolds 2.

    [/QUOTE]

    Bingo Dat!!!

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from dublin-red-sox. Show dublin-red-sox's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    I'm not sure about that. its not like he hits a ton of home runs. He's a brutal hitter and he is a liability on defense. I think pretty much everyone is getting close to thinking he might be trade bait. 




    "Stanwyk: Do you own a pair of rubber gloves Mr Fletcher?
    Fletch: I rent with an option to buy."

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to dublin-red-sox's comment:


    I'm not sure about that. its not like he hits a ton of home runs. He's a brutal hitter and he is a liability on defense. I think pretty much everyone is getting close to thinking he might be trade bait. 




    "Stanwyk: Do you own a pair of rubber gloves Mr Fletcher?
    Fletch: I rent with an option to buy."




    Using WMB as 'bait' only works if you're 'fishing' for minnows.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    I sure hate to give up on the kid, as he certainly did show some promise in mlb.  HUGE PROMISE in fact.  I'd sure hateto be the guy who had to pull the trigger on a short  sell with WMB stock.

    TOUGH CALL!  but there is no doubt he has been absolutely brutal at the plate, and always a big shaky / iffy at 3rd.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to Hfxsoxnut's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Let's face it, defence aside, he's got work to do just to be Deer 2 or Reynolds 2.

    [/QUOTE]

    He is now batting just .197and he just cost us the game tonight because he cannot move to his left to get a ground ball. I think he is a genuine bum. But he will continue to be on the field, apparently, until our attitude improves.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

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

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    I would not give up on him yet. There is a lot of potential there. But at this point, it is pretty clear that we would be a better team with Holt . 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I would not give up on him yet. There is a lot of potential there. But at this point, it is pretty clear that we would be a better team with Holt . 

    Stabbed by Foulke.

    [/QUOTE]

    450 PAs are plenty. What you see is what you get. Middlebrooks stinks. Period. He will always stink. Time to cut him loose.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    Will does seem to be blowing his chance.

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

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:


    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    I would not give up on him yet. There is a lot of potential there. But at this point, it is pretty clear that we would be a better team with Holt . 


    Stabbed by Foulke.




    450 PAs are plenty. What you see is what you get. Middlebrooks stinks. Period. He will always stink. Time to cut him loose.


    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE


     


    [/QUOTE]


    What would you have said about the following player:


     


    483 PAs, 19 HRs, 55 RBIs, 141 Ks, .197 BA, .692 OPS


     


    If you said get rid of him, those were Mike Schmidt's career stats after the 1973 season.


     


    WMB will never be Mike Schmidt.  He may still be a productive player.  He may not.  But neither you nor I are qualified to make that judgement.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from slasher9. Show slasher9's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    interesting comparison Illinois.  i guess the difference is that WMB's numbers are spread over 3 seasons.  he has not approved over that timeframe. 

    Schmidt's 3rd season (24yo):

    .282 / .941 / 36HR / 116rbi / 6th in MVP voting

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from MadMc44. Show MadMc44's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    WMB should be sent to AAA today and Holt or Ryan Roberts brought up. I like Herrera--he is a switch hitter  and Roberts bats R and Holt left but they give you options with a little more pop.


    Speaking of Mark Reynolds---I think he has 8 HR's and 15 RBI, BA only .229 this season. I wanted him as a FA--he rakes at Fenway and most other places. He's a bargain and a threat off the bench. Butter could have improved his D @ 3 B.


    Time to make some changes--we are perhaps 1/2 game better than the Twins--and the same .500 record as the DiceK Mets. Very few household names on either of those teams--considerably lower payroll. If they were playing in  the AL East they would both have a shot at the WC.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from illinoisredsox. Show illinoisredsox's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to slasher9's comment:


     


    interesting comparison Illinois.  i guess the difference is that WMB's numbers are spread over 3 seasons.  he has not approved over that timeframe. 


    Schmidt's 3rd season (24yo):


    .282 / .941 / 36HR / 116rbi / 6th in MVP voting


     


     



    Schmidt's were over 2 seasons, a cup of coffee in 72 and a full year in 73, and age-wise, he was a couple years younger than WMB is right now. And of course, the Phillies were putrid in those years (I think it was 72 when they won about 54 games and Steve Carlton won 27 of them).  They could afford to live with the growing pains of one Michael Jack Schmidt.


     


    The lack of improvement on the part of WMB is concerning.  I think we could all live with a .250 average if he can put up 25-30 homers a year. I really wonder if he ever has gotten over that broken wrist that ended his rookie year.  Adjustments on his part or the pitchers aside, the ball hasn't seemed to come off his bat quite the same way even when he makes contact.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to razcreation's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Middlebrooks the next coming of Rob Deer- either HR or strikeouts? He looking more like the next coming of Rob Deer.

    [/QUOTE]

    How about the second coming of Mark Reynolds?

    [/QUOTE]

    I think  Middlebrooks should be the next veteran 3b man for Pawtucket

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to donrd4's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BogieAt12oclock's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to razcreation's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is Middlebrooks the next coming of Rob Deer- either HR or strikeouts? He looking more like the next coming of Rob Deer.

    [/QUOTE]

    How about the second coming of Mark Reynolds?

    [/QUOTE]

    I think  Middlebrooks should be the next veteran 3b man for Pawtucket

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't know. Pawtucket already has a pretty good 3rd baseman.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BogieAt12oclock. Show BogieAt12oclock's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to illinoisredsox's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    In response to dgalehouse's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    I would not give up on him yet. There is a lot of potential there. But at this point, it is pretty clear that we would be a better team with Holt . 

     

    Stabbed by Foulke.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    450 PAs are plenty. What you see is what you get. Middlebrooks stinks. Period. He will always stink. Time to cut him loose.

     

     

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]


    What would you have said about the following player:

     

     

     

    483 PAs, 19 HRs, 55 RBIs, 141 Ks, .197 BA, .692 OPS

     

     

     

    If you said get rid of him, those were Mike Schmidt's career stats after the 1973 season.

     

     

     

    WMB will never be Mike Schmidt.  He may still be a productive player.  He may not.  But neither you nor I are qualified to make that judgement.

    [/QUOTE]

    Qualified? Since when does being qualified keep one from having an opinion? I'm not qualified to do brain surgery, but I do it anyway.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    I remember a few years ago this board was buzzing about WMB.  I wanted to keep Youk around but every said we got WMB we got WMB and I started to think that maybe you guys knew something I didn't.  You just don't go out and replace a 400 OBP and stellar defense.  And here we are.  Well, Rob Deer was better than WMB that's for sure. 

    Part of the problem too is that Boggy isn't hitting and that draws your attention to WMB even more because at least Boggy is hitting a little while WMB is not hitting at all.  If WMB is still batting under 200 once he hits 100 PA's, I'd be forced to send him down, sign Drew, slide Boggy over to 3B and trade for a LF (Where was Ben on Mike Morse?).

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from steven11. Show steven11's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I remember a few years ago this board was buzzing about WMB.  I wanted to keep Youk around but every said we got WMB we got WMB and I started to think that maybe you guys knew something I didn't.  You just don't go out and replace a 400 OBP and stellar defense.  And here we are.  Well, Rob Deer was better than WMB that's for sure. 

    Part of the problem too is that Boggy isn't hitting and that draws your attention to WMB even more because at least Boggy is hitting a little while WMB is not hitting at all.  If WMB is still batting under 200 once he hits 100 PA's, I'd be forced to send him down, sign Drew, slide Boggy over to 3B and trade for a LF (Where was Ben on Mike Morse?).

    [/QUOTE]


    good point.  Last night I listened to the end of game on a Joe less weei.  O'Brien started talking about how Xander is due for a homer and how he is stuck with just one and just 5 rbi's.  Most predicted that Xander's numbers would be better in those areas at this point.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from andrewmitch. Show andrewmitch's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to steven11's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to andrewmitch's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I remember a few years ago this board was buzzing about WMB.  I wanted to keep Youk around but every said we got WMB we got WMB and I started to think that maybe you guys knew something I didn't.  You just don't go out and replace a 400 OBP and stellar defense.  And here we are.  Well, Rob Deer was better than WMB that's for sure. 

    Part of the problem too is that Boggy isn't hitting and that draws your attention to WMB even more because at least Boggy is hitting a little while WMB is not hitting at all.  If WMB is still batting under 200 once he hits 100 PA's, I'd be forced to send him down, sign Drew, slide Boggy over to 3B and trade for a LF (Where was Ben on Mike Morse?).

    [/QUOTE]


    good point.  Last night I listened to the end of game on a Joe less weei.  O'Brien started talking about how Xander is due for a homer and how he is stuck with just one and just 5 rbi's.  Most predicted that Xander's numbers would be better in those areas at this point.

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah the only way to tolerate his Defense and lack of power is if he bats 300/375 OBP - consistently.  I won't send him down but I would move him around in the order and in the field and I would be prepared to make other moves due his performance.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    The bottom line is that if we did not have no-hit Bradley (.219/.650) and little ball Bogaerts (.252/.705) in our anemic lineup we could possibly afford to give the useless Wil Middlebrooks (no defense and .197/.664) a little more time. Because all three are regulars in our lineup we rank 11th in runs scored in the AL of the 15 teams. Not good enough. One of those guys, at least, has to go immediately, and since Middlebrooks' overall performance is the worst, he should go right away. In fact, he should already be gone.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    What would you have said about the following player:

    483 PAs, 19 HRs, 55 RBIs, 141 Ks, .197 BA, .692 OPS

    If you said get rid of him, those were Mike Schmidt's career stats after the 1973 season.

    WMB will never be Mike Schmidt. He may still be a productive player. He may not. But neither you nor I are qualified to make that judgement.

    First, this is not brain surgery. Its easy to see that, based on his numbers, Middlebrooks is highly unlikely to ever become what we need at the corner IF position. NO ONE knows for sure which players will suddenly and unexpectedly blossom, but there comes a point where you admit you likely made a mistake with a player and cut ties. That time was several weeks ago with Middlebrooks. He is below average defensively and has proven he cannot hit the baseball. He is not allowed to stay in the clubhouse due to his sterling personality. I expect his time in the major leagues is very short now. I have confidence in our management that they are not stupid enough not to see what most of us can see.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

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

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    Where is Joe Castiglione?

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hfxsoxnut. Show Hfxsoxnut's posts

    Re: Middlebrooks- Rob Deer?

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    What would you have said about the following player:

    483 PAs, 19 HRs, 55 RBIs, 141 Ks, .197 BA, .692 OPS

    If you said get rid of him, those were Mike Schmidt's career stats after the 1973 season.

    WMB will never be Mike Schmidt. He may still be a productive player. He may not. But neither you nor I are qualified to make that judgement.

    First, this is not brain surgery. Its easy to see that, based on his numbers, Middlebrooks is highly unlikely to ever become what we need at the corner IF position. NO ONE knows for sure which players will suddenly and unexpectedly blossom, but there comes a point where you admit you likely made a mistake with a player and cut ties. That time was several weeks ago with Middlebrooks. He is below average defensively and has proven he cannot hit the baseball. He is not allowed to stay in the clubhouse due to his sterling personality. I expect his time in the major leagues is very short now. I have confidence in our management that they are not stupid enough not to see what most of us can see.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

    [/QUOTE]

    'has proven he cannot hit the baseball'?

    C'mon Pumps, you can do better than that with your wording.  He's hit 34 major league home runs, so wouldn't that prove he can hit the baseball? 

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share