The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL

  1. This post has been removed.

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

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

    Another "Wastefield is better than other bottom of the rotation starters" thread.
     
    1) This is about the strength of AL 5/6 starters this year and in the recent past.
    2) It's only a fraction of the Wake bashing threads you have started.


    Young pitchers get MLB experience from pitching MLB baseball, not sitting behind a 5 plus 2 plus year good ole boy.

    Actually, that is precisely what is happening all over the league, especially among contending teams. Young pitchers "get experience" by earning their way onto the ML staff, injuries to ML starters, teams that are out of it and want to "take a look", or the ML starters are so horrible that any other choice is better (your "Wally" nonsense).

    Every time, youth needs to be run in and out to cover those Wastefield innings. They either get better on the second or third opporunity on the active roster, or they get bumped in favor of the next young player looking for the opportunity to get experience.

    Totally bogus.

    The reality is that Wastefield has no chance of ever becoming a solid MLB starter. He's old and familiar and would be released by most every other team.

    Then why don't all the teams I listed release their 4,5,6 and 7 starters that have worse numbers than Wake? Plus, Wake is pitching for cheaper than many of them and going longer into games than almost all of them (IP per GS).

    Aceves and the younger talent should have taken those early season innings when they were sitting behind Wastefield.

    Who? Miller? The guy had almost as many BBs and IP in AAA when you wanted him to start.

    Who? Weiland?

    Who? The injured Doubrong?

    Who? Wally?


    The more experience the youth gets, the faster one of them will mature and emerge as a viable long term option.

    The Sox are 9-4 in Wake starts. A contending team can not gamble as you wish.

    Another "Wastefield is better than other bottom of the rotation starters" thread.

    Young pitchers get MLB experience from pitching MLB baseball, not sitting behind a 5 plus 2 plus year good ole boy. Every time, youth needs to be run in and out to cover those Wastefield innings. They either get better on the second or third opporunity on the active roster, or they get bumped in favor of the next young player looking for the opportunity to get experience.

    The reality is that Wastefield has no chance of ever becoming a solid MLB starter. He's old and familiar and would be released by most every other team.

    Aceves and the younger talent should have taken those early season innings when they were sitting behind Wastefield.

    The more experience the youth gets, the faster one of them will mature and emerge as a viable long term option.

    Posting Stats for Miller and Weiland is ludicrious! Totally intellectually dishonest!
    They have tiny samples and are just cutting their baby teeth with the Red Sox. Miller has prior MLB stints, and has some decent outings. He's going south, now, but he should give way to youth, not some old goofball thrower trying to hang around for some meaningless cumaltive record. An ERA over 5 for over 2 years should get him kicked out faster than Mike Cameron.

    Doubrant, Weiland and Miller should finish the season competing for the bottom feeder innings and spot starts. Get rid of Wastefield, so he can make good on his threat to joing the great Tampa Bay Rays!
    They have tiny samples and are just cutting their baby teeth with the Red Sox.

    You mean, like you did with "Jake"?
    You mean the tiny sample sizes you blasted Wake for last year (2 game sample size)?
    You mean the ludicrous (Yes, you "mispelled" it, as you did "opurnity and "cumaltive") cherry-picking samples you have been posting in flailing attempts to scramble from idiotic position after position?

    Miller has prior MLB stints, and has some decent outings.

    I really can't believe you are bringing up Miller's "prior stints" as a defense of his numbers. They are worse than his numbers here.

    Aren't you the guy who keeps saying players will play to their "career norm"?

    Do you even bother to look what Miller's "career norm" is?
    What his numbers were last year or in 2009, or in the minors?

    You were bashing Wake long before 7 starts (tiny sample?).
    You linked his post back surgery numbers of 2010 with his 2011 starts, but refuse to do the same for Miller.

    Miller's career ERA before today's meltdown and "launching pad" performance to a "pitiful offensive team" as you called them was:

    5.73

    His career WHIP before his 11 in 3.2 IP today was 1.737.

    His numbers in 2010?
    Better than Wake?

    1-5  8.54  (2.357 WHIP) in 9 games.

    He has 14 starts in 2010-2011 and 28 from 2009-2011. His WHIP has not been lower than 1.600 in any of the last 3 years, and yet this is the guy you claim is better- based on the numbers?

    Silly clown.

    He's going south, now, but he should give way to youth, not some old goofball thrower trying to hang around for some meaningless cumaltive record. An ERA over 5 for over 2 years should get him kicked out faster than Mike Cameron.

    It's not about the record, silly clown; it's about 9-4.

    Doubrant, Weiland and Miller should finish the season competing for the bottom feeder innings and spot starts. Get rid of Wastefield, so he can make good on his threat to joing the great Tampa Bay Rays!

    Doubront is not ready.
    Weiland is a huge gamble.
    Miller has talent, but is wild.
    Aceves has a strong argument to oust Lackey from the top 5, and a pretty strong argument to give Wake a rest once Buch comes back.

    I assume no matter how badly these guys would do, you'd still claim your righteous position was the correct one: just like the 4 starts in May 2010, when Dice-K had a 7.89 ERA.

    Gonna save this one:

    "Posting Stats for Miller and Weiland is ludicrious! Totally intellectually dishonest!
    They have tiny samples... "

    Classic goalpost, backpedaling, scrambling idiocy.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness'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]Another "Wastefield is better than other bottom of the rotation starters" thread. Young pitchers get MLB experience from pitching MLB baseball, not sitting behind a 5 plus 2 plus year good ole boy. Every time, youth needs to be run in and out to cover those Wastefield innings. They either get better on the second or third opporunity on the active roster, or they get bumped in favor of the next young player looking for the opportunity to get experience. The reality is that Wastefield has no chance of ever becoming a solid MLB starter. He's old and familiar and would be released by most every other team. Aceves and the younger talent should have taken those early season innings when they were sitting behind Wastefield. The more experience the youth gets, the faster one of them will mature and emerge as a viable long term option. Posting Stats for Miller and Weiland is ludicrious! Totally intellectually dishonest! They have tiny samples and are just cutting their baby teeth with the Red Sox. Miller has prior MLB stints, and has some decent outings. He's going south, now, but he should give way to youth, not some old goofball thrower trying to hang around for some meaningless cumaltive record. An ERA over 5 for over 2 years should get him kicked out faster than Mike Cameron. Doubrant, Weiland and Miller should finish the season competing for the bottom feeder innings and spot starts. Get rid of Wastefield, so he can make good on his threat to joing the great Tampa Bay Rays!
    Posted by billbyboy[/QUOTE]

    The reality is: You have no concept of reality.
    Will you be here when Wake notches #200?
     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

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

    Of course he will.

    Being in denial is his favorite pastime these days.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Wake's starts in 2010 and 2011: the years softy claims we could have done much better with "Wally" on the mound.

    2011: 13 starts
    0 ER : 0
    1 ER:  3
    2 ER:  1
    3 ER:  3
    4 ER:  1  (6 IP)
    5 ER:  3  (5.1, 5.1, and 6 IP)
    6 ER:  1  (4.1 IP)
    7 ER:  1  (6.1 IP)

    7 out of 13 starts with 3 or less ER and putting our team in a strong position to win.  (The pen blew one of his 1 ER starts).

    8 out of 13 were 4 or less ER. Still putting our team a good position to win.
    Only 2 of 13 starts were 6 + ER, but we won one of those.

    2010: 19 starts

    0 ER: 1
    1 ER: 1
    2 ER: 3
    3 ER: 5
    4 ER: 2
    5 ER: 2
    6+ ER: 5

    That's 9 out of 19 starts with 3 or less ER.
    That's 11 out of 19 starts with 4 or less ER.
    That's 5/19 starts with 6+ ER.

    2010-2011 combined: 32 starts
    0 ER: 1
    1 ER: 4
    2 ER: 4
    3 ER: 8
    4 ER: 3
    5 ER: 5
    6+ ER: 7

    2009: 21 starts
    3, 2, 1, 0, 5, 2, 7, 1, 5, 6, 3, 3, 2, 4, 0, 5, 3, 1, 4, 4, 5

    2009-2011 combines: 53 starts

    That's 29/53 starts with 3 or less ER allowed.
    That's 32/53 starts with 4 or less.
    That's 9/53 with 6+ ER allowed.

    2008:
    22/30 3 or less
    24/30 4 or less
    5/30 with
    6 +

    Wake2008-2011:
    51/83 with 3 or less  (61.4%)
    56/83 with 4 or less  (67.5%)
    14/83 with 6+            (16.9%)

    Andrew Miller has 61 career starts (done "cutting teeth")
    35/61 with 3 or less ERs (57.4%)

    2011: 3, 1, 2, 3, 7, 0, 7
    2010: 1, 1, 7, 5, 5, 4, 4
    2009: 4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 3, 1, 3, 4, 1, 5, 3, 2, 4 (DL)
    2008: 5, 6, 5, 3, 1, 6, 2, 0, 2, 2, 4, 2, 4, 1, , 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 7
    2007: 0, 4, 3, 0, 5, 1, 2, 1, 5, 2, 6, 6, 5 

    Total as a starter:
    18-25 5.70  (1.760 WHIP)
    IP as starter: 301.1
    IP per GS: 4.9

    Wake has average over 6 IP per GS (about 1 1/3 more IP per start than Miller) and still has a better percent of games with 3 or less ERs allowed.

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

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

    Like UR really gonna beat Softy with logic. His bias rules his world.
     
  8. 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]Like UR really gonna beat Softy with logic. His bias rules his world.
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I was thinking the same thing; moon shouldn't bother. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

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

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

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

    I'm about ready to stop exposing softy. It has gotten to the point where it is beyond absurdity. He even went so far as to say that I was being "intellectually dishonest" for using small sample sizes on Miller & Weiland, two players just "cutting their teeth". The absurdity is reaching levels that go beyond the need to expose. It is now clear to everyone.

    (Miller now has 61 MLB starts under his belt.)
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    softy always turns every thread into a Wake or Jake bash. OK, let's go there...

    This thread was just about expectations of 5/6 slot starters. History shows most teams that have gone and won or lost the WS have had at least one of their top 5 starters with a 5.00+ ERA. The fact that some posters are attempting to make the 5.00+ ERA by our 4th, 5th, 6th and beyond one of the main issues to debate, as in, it is the most important area of need on this team.

    As to who should be our starters has been a debate all season, and nearly every year. This year, there is no debate that Beckett, Lester and Buch are our top 3 starters. With Buch out, we now need 3 slots filled. The likely list below:

    1) Aceves  3.44  (5.14 Starter ERA)
    2) Wake     5.15  (5.22 Starter ERA)
    3) Miller     5.45_(5.45 Starter ERA)__
    4) Lackey  6.28  (6.28)
    5) Weiland 8.10 (8.10)
    6) Doubront 6.75 (n/a)

    Overall WHIP (Starter WHIP)
    1) Aceves   1.176  (1.571-7th)
    2) Wake      1.360  (1.399 -4th)
    3) Lackey   1.538  (1.538-6th)_________________
    4) Miller      1.900  (1.900) (Estimateafter tonight)
    5) Weiland 1.900  (1.900)
     
    6) Doubront 2.250 (n/a)

    Only Aceves has a better (slightly) starter ERA than Wake on this list of 6. None of the other 5 starters has a starter WHIP even close to Wake's.

    Here is another way to look at our bottom tier starters:

    Wake: 13 GS,  6-3 (9-4 team record), 5.22,  (1.399 WHIP)
      IP 79.1,  H 86,  BB 25, HBP 3,  K 40

    Others: 29 GS, 13-11 ( team record 16-13), 6.06, (1.769 WHIP)
      IP 157.1, H 187, BB 71, HBP 20, K 97 (106 ER)
      (Not counting Dice-K)

                     IP /H / BB/HBP/K
    Aceves 21.0 /20/13/5 /13 (team record 1-3)
    A.Miller 34.2/41/24/1/17  (team record 6-1 )
    Lackey  91.2/112/29/12/63 (team record 8-8)
    Weiland 10.0/14/5/2/4  (team record 1-1)

    Look beyond just numbers (or traditionally used numbers)...

    Wake's 13 starts:
                      IP  H  ER BB (comments)
    1) vs Sea  5.2  3  1  1  
    (left with 2 outs and man on 1st: Jenks allowed his runner to score plus 1 more and Wake gets no decision: Sox win anyways)

    2) vs Min  4.1  9  6  4 (started 5 days earlier/pitched relief 2 days before)
    (scored 2 runs on BB, IF hit, GB single and Balk)

    3) vs Cubs  6  7  4  1
     (shut out through 6.2, then two dbls = 1 run)

    4) @ Det   7   5  2  2
     (1 run scores on seeing eye GB single, SB and another seeing eye GB single.)

    5) vs CWS  6  7  4  1
     (shut out through 4.2, then BB, bloop single, SB, Groundout to SS, Gb double down 3B line that could have been fielded by Youk)

    6) @ NYY   5.1  5  5  3
     (Shutout through 4 IP, then 3 runs on BB, PB, 1B, 2B, GB -man to 3rd-Sac Fly, then in 6th 2 outs and BB, and Aceves comes in and allows his run to score.)

    7) @ TB     7   4  1  5
     (Shut out for 4.1 IP then HR, in 6th BB, PB, BB, GB runners advance and Passed Ball allows run to score.)

    8) vs Mil   8   3 2  1
     (2-runo HR in 2nd + solo HR in 7th: no bad luck)

    9) @ Pitt   6   7  5  4
     (shut out for 4.1 IP, and 1B, SB, BB, HR, 2B, GB single for 3 runs, 4th run scores on cheap single to 3B -Youk muffs it, and a 2B to CF that Ellsbury misjudged-could have been caught, then a GB to 2B.)

    10) @ Hou  5.1  11  5  0
     (1st inning: 1B, SB, GB runner to 3B, Sac Fly, 2 runs score in 2nd on 2B, 1B, bunt 1B to 3B, and 2B, in the 5th: GB single, WP, 2B)
     
    11) vs Tor    7    9  3  1
     (3rd inning: swinging bunt single, 1B, GB runners advance, Sac Fly, long 1B)

    12) @ Bal    4.2  9  3  2
     (1st: 2 outs then weak 1B to 3B, hard 1B, then 3B for 2 runs. 5th: 2 Ks, HR, HR, 1B, bloop 1B-could have been caught, BB, 2B clears bases)

    13) vs Sea  6.1  10  7  1
     (1st: HBP & HR, 5th: K, BB, seeing eye GB 1B, 2B scores 1, Wake enters the 7th ahead 11-3. He could have been relieved, but he stays in and allows: 4 runs on 3 singles and HR)

    It's easy to see how Wake could easily have an ERA of about 4.00 or 4.25, but it is what it is.

    I'm not trying to be a Wake apologist. I know he has let up a lot of runs this year. I know every pitcher has some cheap runs scored off them. I just know that Wake has pitched better than his numbers indicate. How much better? Look and judge objectively for yourself.

    Some interesting observations on Wake this year:
    In Opponents...
    1st PA: .778 OPS
    2nd PA: .677 OPS
    3rd PA: .942 OPS
    4th+ PA:  1.121 OPS

    Pitch 1-25:   .735
    Pitch 26-50: .727
    Pitch 51-75: .805
    Pitch 76-100: 1.143

    It appears Wake should probably be taken out a bit earlier than he has been thus far. Tito seems to keep him in longer than others, perhaps to "save the pen". Wake has the 3rd highest IP/GS on the Sox.

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

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

    Nice work Moon.
    As for Softone, he's robotically baiting to vent his fantasy.
    His bias rules his thought pattern.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Forget softy.

    This team is too much fun to have some clown darken the skies.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

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

    Lackey is preventing all our great young pitching prospects from getting their chance
     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. This post has been removed.

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

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

    Fact: silly clown wanted anyone but Wake.
    Fact: Wake has done better than every single one of the alternatives and better than one starter ahead of him (Lackey).

    Fact: silly clown said Wake causes overuse of the pen, because he doesn't last long in games he starts.
    Fact: Wake is 3rd on the team in IP per GS. All the alternatives do not last as long.

    Fact: silly clown says Wake  walks too many people. 
    Fact: Combine 2010 & 2011 and Wake has the best BB/9 ratio of any starters on our team.

    Fact: silly clown hates and bashes 12  players and coaches, managers and the GM on this team.

    Fact: I am not a big Wake fan at all. I am only defending him against haters and bash artists like the silly clown, who are still claiming others would have been and have been better than him. 

    Fact: We all know if Wake had Lackey's numbers and Lackey had Wake's, silly clown would be saying Lackey is better. If Miller had Wake's numbers and Wake had Miller's, he'd be using those numbers to bash Wake. If Weiland had Wake's numbers... etc...

    Fact: I have continuously said I do not think Wake should be a starter all year long and is due a break. Silly clown distorts my views (and others) and lies about my position to deflect from his own horrible record. Yes, I was wrong on TB this year, wrong that MN could afford Mauer (as was softy's claim that Mn would sign him for no more than $17-18M/yr), and wrong on several other positions and projections. However, I have never been wrong on 99% of my positions in an 8 month time period as silly clown has been. 

    Flipping a coin would have a better record than this silly clown.

    Even lone softyphile, Burrito, has been silent in his defense recently. 
     
  18. This post has been removed.

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

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

    fact: Ells  ... never mind
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness'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]Fact: silly clown wanted anyone but Wake. Fact: Wake has done better than every single one of the alternatives and better than one starter ahead of him (Lackey). Fact: silly clown said Wake causes overuse of the pen, because he doesn't last long in games he starts. Fact: Wake is 3rd on the team in IP per GS. All the alternatives do not last as long. Fact: silly clown says Wake  walks too many people.  Fact: Combine 2010 & 2011 and Wake has the best BB/9 ratio of any starters on our team. Fact: silly clown hates and bashes 12  players and coaches, managers and the GM on this team. Fact: I am not a big Wake fan at all. I am only defending him against haters and bash artists like the silly clown, who are still claiming others would have been and have been better than him.  Fact: We all know if Wake had Lackey's numbers and Lackey had Wake's, silly clown would be saying Lackey is better. If Miller had Wake's numbers and Wake had Miller's, he'd be using those numbers to bash Wake. If Weiland had Wake's numbers... etc... Fact: I have continuously said I do not think Wake should be a starter all year long and is due a break. Silly clown distorts my views (and others) and lies about my position to deflect from his own horrible record. Yes, I was wrong on TB this year, wrong that MN could afford Mauer (as was softy's claim that Mn would sign him for no more than $17-18M/yr), and wrong on several other positions and projections. However, I have never been wrong on 99% of my positions in an 8 month time period as silly clown has been.  Flipping a coin would have a better record than this silly clown. Even lone softyphile, Burrito, has been silent in his defense recently. 
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    He can't keep up. Two-finger typist.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59'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]fact:  alternatves would do better than wastefield. miller is 6-1 by your own measure. 

    No, that was your measure. And, with Buch out, both would start under your nes criteria.

    fact: you are the same buffoon who said lowell was a valid use of a 2010 roster spot. 

    Lie. I said Theo was keeping him as insurance. 

    fact: you are the same buffoon who said the rays arent going away
    Posted by billbyboy[/QUOTE]

    The same guy who projected 2 more wins than you. If that make me a buffoon, you must be what?
    Wrong on Mauer.
    Wrong on AGon- 3 times.
    Wrong on BHall.
    Wrong on Crawford at leadoff.
    Wrong on Cameron.
    Wrong on Reddick.
    Wrong on VTek/Salty.
    Wrong on Wake.
    Wrong on Jake.
    Wrong on Miller-Weiland.
    Wrong on Lackey.
    Wrong on Bedard or Sheets for 2010.
    Wrong on Theo.
    Wrong on "Fatman" Beckett.
    Wrong on Wheeler.
    Wrong on much much more...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

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

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

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

    Huh?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox'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]In Response to Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL : The same guy who projected 2 more wins than you. If that make me a buffoon, you must be what? Wrong on Mauer. Wrong on AGon- 3 times. Wrong on BHall. Wrong on Crawford at leadoff. Wrong on Cameron. Wrong on Reddick. Wrong on VTek/Salty. Wrong on Wake. Wrong on Jake. Wrong on Miller-Weiland. Wrong on Lackey. Wrong on Bedard or Sheets for 2010. Wrong on Theo. Wrong on "Fatman" Beckett. Wrong on Wheeler. Wrong on much much more...
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    Wow, thats not a very good BA
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59'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]In Response to Re: The Truth About # 5-6 Starters in the AL : Wow, thats not a very good BA
    Posted by craze4sox[/QUOTE]

    That's just the tip of the iceberg.

    The two things he is claiming vicory on is a 1 game sample size of Cameron and the fact that TB has "gone away" this year (his victory is actually him projecting 88 wins and I predicted 90-92). 

    He's like 0.75 for 1,000.
     

Share