The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

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

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    In Response to Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL:
    [QUOTE]The biggest weakness, though, has been the starting rotation.  Bronson Arroyo , not even one full season into a three-year, $35 million contract extension, has a 5.58 ERA, the worst of his career since becoming a fulltime starte.... Taken from foxsports.com
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Figured why start a thread on it, just slipping this in. With talk of Lowe I just wanted tom point out that Boston is not the only team with disappointments on their staff.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    Burr,

    Why start a thread on the status of AL 4,5,6th slot starters?

    Because many posters seem to think...
    1) 5th starters are typically under 5.00 guys.
    2) AL Teams that make it to the WS don't have 4th or 5th starters with high ERA and high WHIPs.
    3) Our 5th starters are worse than most team's 5th starter.
    4) Our 5th starter is our highest need.

    Answers:
    1) The typical AL 5th starter is over 5.00.
    2) Most AL teams who go to the WS have 1-2 (one had 3) starters with 5+ ERAs.
    3) Our 5th starters are better than most team's 5th starters. 
    4) We don't need another 5th starter: we have plenty of capable 5th starters. Our highest need is a 3rd starter, so the rest of our "capable 5th starters" can compete for the 4 and 5 slots and not the 3,4 & 5 lots.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    no no I wasn't talking about your thread, was saying I did not see the point in making a thread just to throw out the Arroyo note. 
     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

     2008, 2009 and 2010 are as much Bellsbury as 2011 .65 of season. 

    --------------------------------------------

    Can you explain this? (I get the .65 part). For the life of me this sounds like double-talk. What part of spectacular (but a little flawed) OF defense, an AS berth, a .325 BA, lots of SBs, one of the league leaders in OPS,  and 17 HRs in a tough Lefty Homer park do you NOT understand?
     
  6. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    In Response to Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL:
    [QUOTE]Adam Jones was an AS. Its not about one season.
    Posted by billbyboy[/QUOTE]

    Bad example; Adam Jones is a GG caliber CFer who's hitting .289 with 18 HRs and 62 RBIs.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    The Twins obviously could afford Mauer. Most teams in the league can afford one contract of that size. That is the problem though, unlike Boston who can carry 2 or even 3 of these contracts, the teams are thereafter hamstrung.

    I said at the time that signing Mauer would be a mistake for Minnesota, and I thought and still think it would have been a mistake to sign Joe in Boston. It may have forever altered our financial landscape making it less likely that AGON would be acquired.

    Players like Mauer are special but they do not deserve gargantuan contracts solely based on a batting title and leadership. Where's the ribbies? Where are the homers? He does not produce those enough to satisfy the needs of the team for that sort of pay.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    You lyin NYT's shill!

    The Times has been in the hands of big biz and guys like Rupert Murdoch for years. I hate the Times, but for some reason you keep pretending to know my politics. Chalk up another blundering lie by the great pretender.

    Wrong on Mauer.

    It was Softlaw who said, alone, Twins could afford and would extend Mauer. It was you, stupid buffoon, who went on and on about how the Yankees would drive up the market and the Twins couldnt afford him.   
    Yes, and I adsmitted I was wrong, but you fail to mention that you claimed he'd sign for $17-18M/yr. You were way off and then changed your story afterwards with all previous records erased.

    Wrong on AGon- 3 times.

    Softlaw was along in saying Agon would 100% be fire sold over this winter, after the Padres owner said they were not trading him over the winter. You stupid buffoon said the Padres might wait until the summer because they could first see if they could stay in the race like 2010.    

    Softy said 50-50. We all read it. He even defended it. We pleaded to get off the fence. He stayed put. Then changed his story again. Wrong #1. He then said we'd trade Jake and Jed for AGon once it became a sure thing he'd be dealt. Wrong #2. He then had a lengthy thread claiming AGon would not sign in April. He called us all idots for saying he would: wrong #3. 3 wrongs on one guy!

    wrong on BHall.

    Softlaw was right on hall. UIFer who was hated when picked up cheap in 2010 and who softlaw said was a black hole OBP but was a UIF/UOF fit because of price and pop. he hit about 18 homers and pitched better than Fatfield. 
    You were against the trade at the start. I was 100% for it. You wanted Kotchman at 1B and Youk at 3B. You then said you wanted Nick Johnson, later you changed your story by saying you were the leader on Beltre. You lies never ned. Now, you are making a 1 inning pitched judgement: you are exposed silly clown.

    Wrong on Crawford at leadoff.

    Softlaw was right on not signing Crawbust. Softlaw is right that the only place for this 142M bust is now leadoff. No one knows what Crawford would do as everyday leadoff, if he was told not to try and be a #3 hitter. Softlaw is right. 

    You weren't the only one against Crawford's signing, but you have wanted and still want Crawford at leadoff over "Jake". Your hatred of Jake has clouded your judgement. You have said OBP is all about OBP, but want a .335 OBP to be in front of Pedey, AGon and Youk.. Silly clown.

    Wrong on Cameron.

    Softlaw was right on Cameron, hurt in 2010 with Bellsbury and thrown under the 142M Crawbust Theo bus. Doing fine with more PT with Marlins.  

    Buffoon that you are, you were singing the praised of dumpster dive hermida 
    Oh, now injury matters? Silly clown.

    Wrong on Reddick.

    Softlaw said Reddick had potential and should be kept with Kalish and Bellsbury traded before the end of 2011. He's right. 


    Another bare faced lie. You have always said no prospect is worth keeping over getting a top flight player in trade. You bashed boom mercilessly for his praise of Reddick. You cited small ML sample sizes to bash him over and over. (your specialty). Now, you do a 180 and start even more lies wioth this response. You are a tool.

    Wrong on VTek/Salty.

    Softlaw is right on Salty/Vtek. Two wooden butchers with substandard arms and blocking ability and too weak on hitting to make up for it. You were wrong in claiming VMart and a capable arm and blocking veteran doesnt top the butcherin passed balls of Boston.
     
    Clinging to a delusion. I claimed VTek and Salty could come close to last year's catching OPS of .793 and you called me a fool. You totally discount CERA-related issues because you are too feeble-minded to even understand how it is supposed to be used. Your misrepresentation of VMart's record and skillset is mind-boggling. You claimed he was an "elite hitter" and then said Matt Holliday is not. Then you lied about that. More silly clown.

    Wrong on Wake.

    Softlaw said Wastefield was a 5 plus ERA since last half of 09 fat loser and an old human homer launching pad. You are wrong on your beloved fatfield being worth a Lowell memorial good ole boy wasted roster spot with his smiling fat face after giving up a slam and throwing a 5 plus ERA goofball.      
    Your racism is clear. Your hate is clear. Find another team to love/bash.

    Wrong on Jake.

    Softlaw said Bellsbury wasn't the gold glove CF'er you said he was in 2008. Media and you followed Soflaw and later admitted he had fielding issues. Touted to be the next Ted Williams or Ichiro, 2008, 2009 and 2010 are as much Bellsbury as 2011 .65 of season. Overrated and benefiting from Agon in 2011. Softlaw is right on this contract seeking prima donna.   
    Yes, he still has fielding issues. I have agreed with you on that. That may have been the last time you were right on anything: summer of 2008.  He was touted to be the next Teddy by one old man. You act as iff all Red Sox nation agreed. You used one man's opinion to springboard your racist vitriol against a liberal college attending player that has far exceeded your projections. You will never admit you were wrong, but we all know better. Blaming his season on AGon? You stoop so low, clown.

    Wrong on Miller-Weiland.

    Miller-Weiland is better than Fatfield. Miller better record and Weiland just 2 or 3 starts. Buffon that you are claims Wastefield is better and deserves the squat spot do nothing roster spot and emergency starter innings. You now say "Wastefield needs a rest. His fat butt needs a kick to Tampa.    
    You are still clinging to lies. You use ERA to judge Wake. Look fool: he is better than Miller and Weiland.

     Wrong on Lackey.

    You buffoon wanted Lackey offered his value bust contract. Softlaw said 30M tops and Lackey was fools gold. Softlaw was right. Fat ERA for 2010 and a big stinkin value bust in 2010 and 2011.
    Total lies. You said he was 1 year overpaid. Fact. Silly clown.


    Wrong on Bedard or Sheets for 2010.

    Softlaw was right on paying low single digit one year contract. You buffoon wanted to pay Slackey 20M for 2010.
    Right? The guy was hurt all year.

    Wrong on Theo.

    Softlaw was right on stupid boy wonder and his 142M Crawford contract and looking in dumpsters for a Rh OFer and lying to the press about serious offer attempts to extend Bellsbury.   
    Your hatred is shining brightly today. Let me get my sunglasses.

    Wrong on "Fatman" Beckett.

    Softlaw was right on not givin an early 2010 contract to fat and out of shape 2010 Beckett. had Theo waited until 2nd half, Beckett would have signed for 40% less costs.
    Beckett would be gone if Theo listened to you, silly clown.

    Wrong on Wheeler.

    Softlaw said one year low single digits on wheeler was a good move, and not to touch whitesox dumpster Jenks. Softlaw was right. Jenks is a bust at 12M and Wheeler has pitched well after one DL stint and is cheap and option best of both world control for one more year or can be let go.

    Buffoon applauded the 2 year deal for fatty Jenks. 
    Wheeler has not pitched well. Admit defeat, fool.

    Wrong on much much more...

    Buffoon is wrong on Rays not going away, now selling and near double digits back of WC in July. 

    TB is 7 behind. I have admitted I was wrong. Try it sometimes. Just once. See if you implode.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    Players like Mauer are special but they do not deserve gargantuan contracts solely based on a batting title and leadership. Where's the ribbies? Where are the homers? He does not produce those enough to satisfy the needs of the team for that sort of pay.

    Good post on Mauer. The major thing I liked about Mauer was that he would provide his team with the ability to gain a huge differential on the opposing team's catcher offense...a position that is tradionally a low productive slot.
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    Papi should have sat vs MOST lefties last year. I was 1 for 2. Thats about 49% better than your going rate of accuracy.

    Plus, who was it who said Mikey should DG vs LHPs last spring? Oh yes, it was silly clown himself.

    The same guy who wanted Papi sent to the minors in 2009.
     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    Wow! You didn't deny it this time: you just put a false spin on it.

    Well, "once it was apparent" that Craw, DMac, and Lowrie were hurt or not hitting well, there were no better options than Papi vs LHPs.

    I never said DFA Papi. I said move him down in the line-up. Your lies are getting obsessive and plantiful.

    All my posts are still here. Find where I ever even cam close to saying DFA Papi. You wanted Papi to agree to a fake injury so he could be demoted to AAA. That's what you wanted. Rehab implies injury. You wanted him demoted. Period.
     
  15. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    Rehab is not a demotion. Sitting him v. Lhp policy is a full no confidence vote. You are the only one putting a spin on it. How are the Rays doing?

    Wastefield is a default, as in tennis.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

    I wanted Papi to be moved from the 3 slot to 5, 6 or 7 vs LHPs. You wanted Theo to go to him and ask him to fake an injury to ge ot AAA to "rehab". I'd say my plan is less of a "no confidence vote" than yours.

    I didn't start my "sit Papi vs most LHPs plan" until 2010. You have everything all wrong...again.

    You wanted Mikey to DH vs LHPs in 2010, until you realized he was hurt. You basically agreed with benching Papi vs LHPs, but you made no mentione of "most lefties" as I did. I painstakenly documented the 5-6 LHPs that I would have started Papi against. You made no mention of wanting that, and later criticized what amounted to a less extreme position than your own plan. Now you see why you are called "silly"?
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share