Wakefield and Varitek

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    The agent's job is to get Wakefield a job. It has nothing to do with being brave or a coward. Get psyche help

    The agent's job is to be ethical in his duties. Wastefield getting 15 wins somewhere and a promise of retirement of gifted another contract is pitiful and unethical. I see you have zero response on merits, jerk!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

       We have to put an end to this mad-ness. Last year we had more Tek and Wakefield threads than the rest of the team combined. There just comes a time to go and for these two the time is now.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from davidap. Show davidap's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    We should bring back 2 guys whos supporters admit that they are only good for half a year. Maybe we should have 2 teams, 1 for one half and 1 for the other.

    Correct. During a 162-game season, a team needs contributions from lots of players, whether for three months, a month, a week, or a day. That's why major league teams have minor league affiliates. That's why lots of clubs stock people on the DL with exaggerated injuries.

    The Varitek and Wakefield detractors act as though their "supporters" want the two to play a significant number of innings in an impactful role. I don't see anyone suggesting anything remotely close to that proposition. Speaking for myself, I don't want Varitek back, for the reasons I stated in my previous post. I do think Wakefield could be useful as the 25th man, or as organizational depth.

    Those who support Varitek and Wakefield or who oppose them both need to divorce their baseball acumen from their personal feelings. Apply some objectivity. Evaluate these players as players, not as legacies, or as perceived oldtimer malcontents. What can they do on the field and in the clubhouse, relative to the alternatives? Those should be the only relevant questions.

    When I look at the Red Sox roster right now, I don't see much pitching depth whatsoever. There's Beckett, Lester, Buchholz, Aceves, Bard, and then a long list of question marks. All I'm advocating is that Wakefield be given equal consideration along with the Weilands and Millers. A team needs to be 20-guys deep on the pitching staff to make it through a full 162-game season. Tim Wakefield, in limited innings, can still be a top 20 guy in the Red Sox system. That's it. I'm under no illusions that he's anything more than organizational depth. I don't even think the Red Sox should offer him more than a two-way minor league deal. I'm not sure why that's so controversial. Anyone who thinks that Wakefield doesn't even deserve a minor league deal is simply harboring an irrational hatred for the man.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from attic-dan. Show attic-dan's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

      Let's take this luancy another step. I say bring back J.D. as 4th OF, he is as good at his position as Tek and Wake are at theirs. He would be a bargain at say 2 million for one year. His qualifications are that he can play Fenways tough RF and is a clutch hitter  who got a big hit in '07 play-offs.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hetchinspete. Show Hetchinspete's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]The agent's job is to get Wakefield a job. It has nothing to do with being brave or a coward. Get psyche help The agent's job is to be ethical in his duties. Wastefield getting 15 wins somewhere and a promise of retirement of gifted another contract is pitiful and unethical. I see you have zero response on merits, jerk!
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]

    A true fans job is to see at as he calls it, but without calling player and agents names like you refer to Wakefield as Wastefield and to not post in an inflammatory manner referring to people you do not know as a coward. If you want to disagree with someone on this site you can do it without name calling. I have in the past gotten into name calling sessions and on occasion refer to others as trolls, but only when they start the name calling. Opinions can be posted without name calling !!   
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from davidap. Show davidap's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Let's take this luancy another step. I say bring back J.D. as 4th OF, he is as good at his position as Tek and Wake are at theirs. He would be a bargain at say 2 million for one year. His qualifications are that he can play Fenways tough RF and is a clutch hitter  who got a big hit in '07 play-offs.

    Sounds reasonable. If Drew turns out to be the best option as a fourth outfielder, then bring him back. $2 million for a player of Drew's on-base and defensive abilities would be a bargain, if he'd accept a reserve role.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Moon,

    Normally I would tend to agree if based on stats and both were in their mid thirties but tokeep both players at 40 years doesn't make sense as in both cases they will both most likely continue to decline in skill and ability to contribute. 

    The problem with your argument is twofold:

    1)
    If they to decline, it does not mean they still can't be positive impact players. VTek was and would be our back-up catcher. He had a better OPS than 14 starting catchers. If he declines to 24th best or even 30th best, he's still doing better than almost all back-up catchers. Wake did better than many team's 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th starters. I counted about 50 who did the same or worse than Wake in 2011. If he declines to the point where only 20 or 30 are worse, he could still be an asset.

    2) Has VTek really declined that much?
       VTek's OPS since 2006:
    .725
    .787
    .672
    .703
    .766
    .723
    His 2011 OPS was better than 2 of his previous 3 seasons' OPS, and the only one that was better was his 123 PA 2010 season. The team won a higher percentage of his games in 2011 than in any recent years.

    Yes, he is not the same catcher as pre-2007, but he is still better than several starting catchers. He is not able to catch 120+ games, but with Lava in the wings, we could handle a major injury to Salty.

    I did write earlier that I thought V-Tek could be groomed to manage and without knowing exactly what happened at seasons end other than what we were fed by the usual exploitive and negative Boston Globe press, I still say he could be. But only the FO and players really know what went on in the clubhouse. If V-tek could have provided leadership and failed then he doesn't desrve a chance to coach or manage.   

    That's a tough call. You are right, it's hard to know what happened, and if he tried or not. I think he'd make a fine pitching coach. 
     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Most get running Varitek and Wastefield out on a rail, only  because these two old timers pretend they earned a FA MLB contract offer from the Red Sox. They are an insult to Ortiz and other vets who earned market rate MLB contract offers. Parasites who waste time, money and roster spots.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Do you really want me to write his Avg. since 2007 with RISP. Nevermind the OPS, do you drive in runs in CLUTCH situations?  I looked it up before it was absolutely terrible, nevermind 2 outs and RISP.

    Actually VTek has had some clutch hits, but you miss the point. How many MLB catchers hit well? You are dreaming if you think Vtek compares poorly to the average ML catcher.

    VTek had 36 RBIs in 250 PAs... that's about a 90 RBI in 625 PA rate. (One of the best rates on the 2011 team)

    VTek hit better with RISP than othrwise in 2011.
    .239 to .221
    OPS .762 to  .723

    Remember, he was our back-up catcher, and you expect him to hit like Mauer?

    Guess what? In 2011, there were 15 teams that had a .240 or below BA from their catching position...15!  There were 8 at .223 or below! You guys have to stop expecting a .280 hitter at catcher. Only 3 teams had a BA over .277 from their catchers.

    Do you realize against the Rays in the 2008 Play-offs he was 1-20. 1 hit in 20 at bats. It was a Homer grant you that, but me and my friends kept screaming for Francona to Pinch-Hit for him throughout those Play-Offs. Now it is 4 years later and the Sox haven't moved on yet. Wow.

    Yes, he should have been PH for... I guess that's his fault too.

    I'll dont care about the 1 earned run he saves a Pitcher, if the Catcher drives in 3.

    If he saves 1 ER for every game he catches, he'd be MVP batting .180.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Varitek passed balls and CS% in 2011 do not compare well with nearly every MLB roster catcher.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from ampoule. Show ampoule's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]We should bring back 2 guys whos supporters admit that they are only good for half a year. Maybe we should have 2 teams, 1 for one half and 1 for the other.


    LOL.....good one, Buritto



    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    "Very important to award every roster spot and FA contract on the basis of performance." 

    So why is Lackey coming back, oh long winded one?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    We win with VTek. We don't with others.

    Numbers in games with most innings caught...

    Sox in 2011:
    with VTek    42-22  66%
    with others 48-50  49%

    Take away Beckett's games: 
    VTek     22-13  63%
    Others 48-49  49%

    Sox in 2010:
    with VTek:      19-9  68%
    with others:  70-64 52%

    Sox in 2009:
    with VTek:    62-45  58%
    with others: 33-22  60%

    Sox in 2008:
    with VTek:     73-47  61%
    with others:  22-20  52%

    Sox in 2007:
    with Vtek:     74-48  61%
    with others: 22-18  55%

    Sox in 2006:
    with VTek:    57-35  62%
    with others: 29-41  41%

    Sox in 2005:
    with Vtek:    73-54  58%
    with others: 22-13 63%

    Sox in 2004:
    with Vtek:    72-48  60%
    with others: 26-16  62%

    As VTek ages, we have been winning more and more with him behind the plate. With his horrible hitting, his horrible CS%, and his horrible plate blocking skills, we have won more with him behind the plate than Salty, VMart, Cash, Kottaras, and a few others the past 3 years:

    2010-2011:
    VTek:        61-31  66.3%
    others: 118-114  50.9%

    2009-2011:
    VTek:      123-76   61.8%
    others:  151-136  52.6%
    ______________________

    2004-2008:
    VTek:    349-232  60.1%
    others: 121-108  52.8%

    Call it voodoo. Call it luck. Call it whatever you want, but the trend continues year after year. We win more when VTek handles our pitchers. It's not because he hits better than the other catchers on our team. It's not because he throws better. It's not because he catches better pitchers than the others. It's a fact many of you want to ignore.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    My guess is that 99% of those "W"'s would still be had with a different catcher. Just as he does not factor in the wins, he does not factor in the losses. The team wins these same games with or without Tek. He is non-factor.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]Time to turn the page.     It's a new era and the team needs to get younger.    Sentimentality doesn't win ballgames.
    Posted by OnDeckCircle[/QUOTE]

    It's a shame that sentimentality doesn't win ballgames. If it did, I would have loved to have kept the entire 2004 roster. Life is so unfair.

    Having said that, there are more compelling reasons to keep them. First, experience, and then because for the last two seasons this team has been cut down by injuries. No way they can afford backups that would be anywhere near as efficient at their given positions as they would be for us at the same price.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]My guess is that 99% of those "W"'s would still be had with a different catcher. Just as he does not factor in the wins, he does not factor in the losses. The team wins these same games with or without Tek. He is non-factor.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    If you look at the last 8 years, you'll see the vast majority of our pitchers do much better with Vtek than our other catcher at the time. Some disparities are astounding, like with Beckett and Bard. You may call this a fluke, but the fact is, it is as predictable as anything else in baseball. The past 3-4 years, VTek has been a worse hitter and thrower than the "other catcher(s)", and yet we have won way more with him. Even if you throw out Beckett's numbers, he's still better.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Easy to say when Pedro, Schilling etc., are your guys, and Tek was the majority catcher... someone had to be in there
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    If Varitek was the cause and effect for wins, he would be the highest paid player in baseball, even as a reserve. Utter nonsense. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    I agree.... moon loses a ton of points on this issue. Paying attention to stats to the highest order is the reason we have not won since 2007.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    All CJ/Moonslob does is take sample snipets or post meaningless claims about team numbers that cannot be verified as cause and effect for Wastefield and Varitek.

    Wakefield and VAritek most certainly have PR people come on here through shill bloggers. The two have nothing but a minor league contract tryout for major league roster spot junk heep profiles. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from samclemens. Show samclemens's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek : It's a shame that sentimentality doesn't win ballgames. If it did, I would have loved to have kept the entire 2004 roster. Life is so unfair. Having said that, there are more compelling reasons to keep them. First, experience, and then because for the last two seasons this team has been cut down by injuries. No way they can afford backups that would be anywhere near as efficient at their given positions as they would be for us at the same price.
    Posted by kimsaysthis[/QUOTE]

    I find it hilarious when I see a fan opine that the Boston Red Sox cannot "afford backups" that would be as efficient as the supposedly "inexpensive" veteran tandem at a similar price.  The Red Sox can clearly spend whatever they wish for players and have done that consistently since the new ownership cartel took over.  The recent contracts given to Lackey, Beckett, Ortiz, Drew, Gonzalez, Jenks and Crawford, et. al., demonstrate that money is really no object when it comes go guys they simply have to have and that the only so-called budget ceiling is the luxury tax threshold which they can certainly well afford to pay , but which can be used as a convenient excuse for not re-signing certain guys or paying selected free agents.  Money has not been an issue for the franchise since 1933 when they had by far the richest owner in the sport for decades and decades. 
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from GoUconn13. Show GoUconn13's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]We win with VTek. We don't with others. Numbers in games with most innings caught... Sox in 2011: with VTek    42-22  66% with others 48-50  49% Take away Beckett's games:  VTek     22-13  63% Others 48-49  49% Sox in 2010: with VTek:      19-9  68% with others:  70-64 52% Sox in 2009: with VTek:    62-45  58% with others: 33-22  60% Sox in 2008: with VTek:     73-47  61% with others:  22-20  52% Sox in 2007: with Vtek:     74-48  61% with others: 22-18  55% Sox in 2006: with VTek:    57-35  62% with others: 29-41  41% Sox in 2005: with Vtek:    73-54  58% with others: 22-13 63% Sox in 2004: with Vtek:    72-48  60% with others: 26-16  62% As VTek ages, we have been winning more and more with him behind the plate. With his horrible hitting, his horrible CS%, and his horrible plate blocking skills, we have won more with him behind the plate than Salty, VMart, Cash, Kottaras, and a few others the past 3 years: 2010-2011: VTek:        61-31  66.3% others: 118-114  50.9% 2009-2011: VTek:      123-76   61.8% others:  151-136  52.6% ______________________ 2004-2008: VTek:    349-232  60.1% others: 121-108  52.8% Call it voodoo. Call it luck. Call it whatever you want, but the trend continues year after year. We win more when VTek handles our pitchers. It's not because he hits better than the other catchers on our team. It's not because he throws better. It's not because he catches better pitchers than the others. It's a fact many of you want to ignore.
    Posted by moonslav59[/QUOTE]

    First of all, when Tek is catching, he get to catch with the team's top pitchers most of the times such as Beckett, Lester, Schilling, Pedro, etc.  While all other catchers get to catch with bunch of crappy pitchers such as Wakefield, Miller, Bedard, etc.   That is why Tek's percentage is higher than these other catchers.  

    Anyway, But when I looked at your stats, only like five years he have winning record which that was the last three years, and worse part, Boston didnt even win a playoff game or make into the playoff during that last three year period!!

    And then if we look at his offense stats, he stunk!!!!  He got to go.  He will not improve his offense stats, he will continue to go on decline!!

    Remember Salty is only 26 years old and played his first full season ever at the major league level last year.  He also moved around from one team to another due two of his previous teams were so loaded with young catchers.  So it is unfair for Salty to get criticized.  Give him a couple years and see if he can improve or not.  I strongly think he will since he is starting to build confidence in himself!!

    Bye Tek!!!  Thanks for the memory!!
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Good bye to Varitek.  He had a great run.  On Salty to see him as a guy with upside seems wishful thinking or just plain dreaming.  He was brought along the last year and a half with Varitek by his side and more than any other offensive player on the Red Sox during the great collapse ever was the worst hitter.  He struck out over and over again like someone with no chance of hitting the last six weeks. He was worse than awful.  Lavernway may be a possiblity but Salty was another  terrible Theo move. He may be 26 but he stinks now and has little chance of being the answer.


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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]Easy to say when Pedro, Schilling etc., are your guys, and Tek was the majority catcher... someone had to be in there
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    No, you are missing the point. Guys like Pedro, Schilling and lesser pitchers almost all did better when VTek was behind the plate than our other catcher at the time. CERA is not supposed to be used as an overall seasonal number, but rather broken down pitcher by pitcher in order to take away the aspect that some catchers caught more innings with better or worse pitchers. harness and I have provided years and years of data that clearly shows a pretty wide disparity between how well particular picthers do with Vtek vs the other guy(s). The trend is constant and 8+ years long. To chalk 8 years of data up as luck is not being realistic. 

     

Share