Tim Wakefield's Selfishness

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

    Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness

    In Response to Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness : Nobody is saying keep the 5 slot open for Wake.  We have no MLb ready prospects.  Pitchers do not grow on trees. We don't have the cash to sign 3 good starters. This year proved we need 7-8 starters. A 7/8 slotted starter with an ERA of 5  for only about $1M is not bad. In fact, it is better than most team's #4-5-6 slot pitchers. I don't get why such a fuss is being made about who we have as next year's #7 starter. 
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    moonslav - It's called taking up a roster spot and having a catcher to deal with his knuckleball. How many extra runs (unearned) did Wake give up due to his knuckler and passed balls? Tim Wakefield gave up 110 runs, of which 88 were earned for a total of 22 unearned runs. Only three other pitchers in all of baseball had more than 15 (Carmona, Blackburn and Garcia). They were not only due to the PB's, but the fact that he was unable to get out of jams or give up home runs after the PB's. Without the PB's, a lot of the runs go away, so conceivably, even a pitcher with a higher ERA would be better suited for the ballclub.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DaffyDan. Show DaffyDan's posts

    Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness

    In Response to Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness:
    [QUOTE]Jeesum crow, are you people kidding me?  First of all, Wakie's push for 200 wasn't selfish; and it didn't cost us the playoffs. You think it was Wake's decision? HE WAS IN THE ROTATION; of course he was put on the mound every five days. Maybe Aceves deserved a start; but Aceves was the MVP of the bullpen and not stretched out for starts. So who would you have put in? Weiland? Miller? They got their starts. There's only so many starting pitchers on a staff.  Tim Wakefield has always done what was asked of him--he went to the bullpen; he closed; he volunteered to give up his start in the 19-8 debacle of the 2004 Game 3 in the ALCS. For people to accuse him of selfishness is further proof that we live in Bizzaro World.   Second, it seems to me that Wakie did better--or just as good--in those nine attempts than any of the other starters. One start was a compete game loss. He went deeper than anyone else. In those 9 losses games leading up to win 200, he went 7 innings three times, 6.1 innings, 8 innings ... and two of those games were Red Sox wins.   Third, he seems to be one of the most stand-up guys in baseball, doing a ton of charity work. But, you're right, he's probably doing that out of selfishness, too.  I'll say it again. Jeesum crow. 
    Posted by NHDieHard[/QUOTE]

    Hate is often devoid of logic. 

    -Daf. 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bill-806. Show Bill-806's posts

    Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness

    In Response to Tim Wakefield's Selfishness:
    [QUOTE]The day of the last year of the season after a horrible month, Tim Wakefield makes it be known that he wants to come back. In reading the paragraph below: “I’ve definitely made up my mind that I definitely want to come back next year,’’ Wakefield said. “I have another goal in front of me that I’d like to accomplish, and that’s the all-time record for the Red Sox in wins. I’m only seven away. I think the fans deserve an opportunity to watch me chase that record. We’ll see what happens.’’ I see nothing about helping the team.  What you can read is: "I've definitely made up my mind.." "I definitely want to come back" "I have another goal.." "...that I'd like to accomplish" "I'm only seven wins away" and last but not least: " I think the fans deserve an opportunity to watch me chase that record. " Not sure about anyone else, but I see nothing in there that says anything about wanting to help the team, etc. After what happened to the Red Sox this year, and having to watch the Tim Wakefield 'Travelin' 200 Circus", if they bring him back next year, it will be 5 times worse. Even Secretariat retired at the right tim, and believe me, Tim Wakefield is no Secreteriat
    Posted by ADG[/QUOTE]AND PROBABLY 70% OF THE REASON THAT TITO IS ON HIS WAY TO HIS NEXT STATION IN LIFE !!!!
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from fivekatz. Show fivekatz's posts

    Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness

    In Response to Re: Tim Wakefield's Selfishness:
    [QUOTE]Jeesum crow, are you people kidding me?  First of all, Wakie's push for 200 wasn't selfish; and it didn't cost us the playoffs. You think it was Wake's decision? HE WAS IN THE ROTATION; of course he was put on the mound every five days. Maybe Aceves deserved a start; but Aceves was the MVP of the bullpen and not stretched out for starts. So who would you have put in? Weiland? Miller? They got their starts. There's only so many starting pitchers on a staff.  Tim Wakefield has always done what was asked of him--he went to the bullpen; he closed; he volunteered to give up his start in the 19-8 debacle of the 2004 Game 3 in the ALCS. For people to accuse him of selfishness is further proof that we live in Bizzaro World.   Second, it seems to me that Wakie did better--or just as good--in those nine attempts than any of the other starters. One start was a compete game loss. He went deeper than anyone else. In those 9 losses games leading up to win 200, he went 7 innings three times, 6.1 innings, 8 innings ... and two of those games were Red Sox wins.   Third, he seems to be one of the most stand-up guys in baseball, doing a ton of charity work. But, you're right, he's probably doing that out of selfishness, too.  I'll say it again. Jeesum crow. 
    Posted by NHDieHard[/QUOTE]Amen brother. If Francona thought he had better options he would have sat him down, like he did for one turn after Miller's solid performance in Texas. If Buch was back and the RS got a bigger name starter at the deadline, Wake would have been in the bullpen in a blink of an eye.
     

Share