Wakefield and Varitek

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    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.  

    100% wrong. Look at every pitcher's numbers side by side between Vtek and Salty, Vtek and VMart, etc... The same pitchers! 

    Plus, even using your argument, you are wrong. VTek hardly catches Lester. If you throw out Beckett's numbers and Wake's for Salty and VMart, VTek is still better overall in CERA and winning %.

    Look at 2009, Vtek caught most of the innings by Penny, Smoltz and Byrd, not just Beckett and Lester. About a third of all VMart's innings caught were with Buch and a greater percent of his innings were spent with lester than VTek with Lester..

    2010 was pretty even, in terms of who caught the best pictchers.

    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!!

    1) Not because of VTek. We had about a  67% win rate with him this year. The last time we made the playoffs, Tito decided not to play VTek in any game. We lost all 3.

    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!!

    Go ahead and ignore the fact that almost all MLb catchers stinkn on offense. Vtek has the 16th best OPS among catchers this year...starting catchers! VTek is ouir back-up. Are you really saying that because our back-up catcher is only better than 14 starting MLB catchers, he has to go?

    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!!

    He fell aprt at the end of the eyar on offense and defense. He had more rest (thanks to VTek catching more innings than all but 2 MLb back-up catchers) than the norm. I hope he continues to improve, but I wouldn't bet on it. His record concerning getting the most out of the pitchers was very poor this year. When compared head-to-head with Vtek, He did worse with about 8 out of the top 10 pitchers by innings.

    Bye Tek!!!  Thanks for the memory!!

    Sounds like your memories are a bit negative.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 111SoxFan111. Show 111SoxFan111's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    It's probably time for Wakefield to go.  Moon, I get your stats arguments, but I think the team just needs to move on and I think a comparable cost "replacement" at worst won't be that much worse than him and, at best, might be a diamond in the rough.  If nothing else, the team needs to make a statement about moving on and there just isn't much to be lost by letting Wake go ... and possibly much to be gained.

    I think there are some solid arguments to bring back Tek if the price is right.  He's still pretty damned good as a back up and his knowledge of the pitchers (or even just being their security blanket) is a nice insurance policy.  Plus, I think it's better for Lava to get consistent starts in AAA than ride the pine in the MLB ... at least for the first half of the season. FWIW, I think it may be worth bringing him back even though I expect he won't last the full season.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    It's probably time for Wakefield to go.  Moon, I get your stats arguments, but I think the team just needs to move on and I think a comparable cost "replacement" at worst won't be that much worse than him and, at best, might be a diamond in the rough.  If nothing else, the team needs to make a statement about moving on and there just isn't much to be lost by letting Wake go ... and possibly much to be gained.

    I have no problem letting him go. I hope we get someone better and younger. Until i see who we get and how much they cost, I am keeping Wake in my mind as a 6th starter option for about $1M.

    I think there are some solid arguments to bring back Tek if the price is right.  He's still pretty damned good as a back up and his knowledge of the pitchers (or even just being their security blanket) is a nice insurance policy.  Plus, I think it's better for Lava to get consistent starts in AAA than ride the pine in the MLB ... at least for the first half of the season. FWIW, I think it may be worth bringing him back even though I expect he won't last the full season.

    He may not be needed as much next year. I'd think of offering him a lifetime services contract to play and coach.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777'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]

    yeah and Boras is ethical..its their job to get him a job...

    with that said, I see no need to spend $$ on a BA catcher when Lava is already in house.
    Wakefield is useless come july and Id have no problem filling his 7th starter slot with someone else younger and more dependable late in the year..
    Say bye bye to both of them..Thanks for the memories guys!!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from ADG. Show ADG's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Let them find jobs elsewhere. The Red Sox should try and fill roster with younger players with a longer term future. Call their bluff. If Wakefield's agent thinks Timmy will win 15 games and there are teams lining up for his services, let him find that job.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]Wakefield is terrible, he is not useful. Call him in the season if you need him. No reason whatsoever to have him anywhere near Ft. Myers in February.
    Posted by BurritoT[/QUOTE]

    Exactly Burrito, but that may not  be possible as his agent said teams were lining up for his services and that he will be a 15-game winner. LMAO.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    There are no cause and effect proof stats on Varisuk. Varitek and Wastefield cost nearly 6M in 2011 for what amounted to a load of dung.

    Offer 1M to the Wangs, Bedards, not 45 year old Wastefield.

    Offer Hernandez 1 year and 3 or 4M.

    That would cost less than the 2 losers frat boys Wastefield and Varitek cost in 2011. 

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]There are no cause and effect proof stats on Varisuk. Varitek and Wastefield cost nearly 6M in 2011 for what amounted to a load of dung. Offer 1M to the Wangs, Bedards, not 45 year old Wastefield. Offer Hernandez 1 year and 3 or 4M. That would cost less than the 2 losers frat boys Wastefield and Varitek cost in 2011. 
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]

    You are so far out of it, it's not even funny anymore.

    Wang already signed... and for $4M

    You are wrong on so many levels now, "silly" is too kind of a word.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek : 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. 
    Posted by samclemens[/QUOTE]

    Do they often go over the luxury tax? I wasn't aware of that.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Financial terms of the contract were not disclosed but Washington media said the was worth $4 million.

    And circle jerk Moonslob, I said offer the wangs and bedards et al the money you want to offer Wastefield.

    No one is more out of touch than someone who would have put Adam Dunn on the Red Sox payroll.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    So, offer the "wangs" a $1M contract?

    You mean offer pitchers that are already signed a contract or offer pitchers who will make $4M a $1M deal? Talk about a "circle jerk".

    At least my offer for Dunn was closer to reality, but still below what he ultimately got. I said after his signing that I'd never have paid Dunn close to that amount, but you go on and on with your lies and distortions. Can we now say, you'd have wanted Wang at $4M? That is essentially what you are saying about Dunn and I.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Your offer for Dunn was absurd, regardless of what fool he hooked . My comment on what to offer a half dozen or more veterans to include the Wangs and Bedards predates Wangs contract. Do you really think clicking on MLBTR is your domain. My offers were to make early time limit to accept offers of 1M plus incentives to these old veterans, not what loose triggers like you one or more  might find. 

    You are offering millions to Varitek and Wastefield, which is beyond absurd, because you are bidding against yourself for two old washed up cows who would accept 500K if it was guaranteed. Minor league contracts for these 40 year old parasites. 
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Your offer for Dunn was absurd, regardless of what fool he hooked . My comment on what to offer a half dozen or more veterans to include the Wangs and Bedards predates Wangs contract.

    Stop the lies. You just repeated your Wang offer yeasterday.

     Do you really think clicking on MLBTR is your domain. My offers were to make early time limit to accept offers of 1M plus incentives to these old veterans, not what loose triggers like you one or more  might find. 

    I had mentioned Wang and others long before you. I'd be happy with several choices other than Wake, if the price isn't $4M for a guy like Wang. That's why Wake remains an option.

    You are offering millions to Varitek and Wastefield, which is beyond absurd, because you are bidding against yourself for two old washed up cows who would accept 500K if it was guaranteed. Minor league contracts for these 40 year old parasites. 

    When they both sign MLB contracts for over $1M, you will deny ever saying this, or will call the GM an idiot, as if that exonerates you from being wrong once again.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    You just repeated your Wang offer yeasterday.


    Repeated is your own clumsy admission that my comment predates Wang contract. I used Wangs and Bedards, you captious idiot.

    Wastefield doesn't remain an option for anyone but lunatics like you. If the two parasites get your 3M elsewhere away from Boston, I'll applaud the first time you were right in the last 100 years.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Re: Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]You just repeated your Wang offer yeasterday. Repeated is your own clumsy admission that my comment predates Wang contract. I used Wangs and Bedards, you captious idiot. Wastefield doesn't remain an option for anyone but lunatics like you. If the two parasites get your 3M elsewhere away from Boston, I'll applaud the first time you were right in the last 100 years.
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]

    You posted this on Monday... weeks after Wang signed...

    There are no cause and effect proof stats on Varisuk. Varitek and Wastefield cost nearly 6M in 2011 for what amounted to a load of dung.

    Offer 1M to the Wangs, Bedards, not 45 year old Wastefield.

    Offer Hernandez 1 year and 3 or 4M.

    That would cost less than the 2 losers frat boys Wastefield and Varitek cost in 2011. 

    Offering $1M to picthers who will get much more than that is futile. Also, It says nothing about incentives. What's the point in mentioning offering "the Wangs" $1M, if the actualy Wang signed for $4M? "The Wangs" are worth 4 times what you think they are.

    You want to spend $5M on two players that will cost more like $7-9M. Brilliant! Even if we could get bedard and Hernandez for $5M, that would leave us about $3-5M to sign Papi (who you want to offer $16M for) and another starter and RF'er.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Offering $1M to picthers who will get much more than that is futile. Also, It says nothing about incentives

    Bedard made 1M in 2011, and Wang didn't make much more in 2011. You read every comment I post, despite claims to put me on ignore. So you know my comment on details of pitcher contract offers made months ago, and "wangs and bedards" is a catchall. Obviously, MLBTR showed what some team offered Wang, so he obviously isn't one of the numerous veteran starters my offers netted. But my offers will net at least 2 or 3 of the ones I listed and I am not going to relist them. 

    Offering Wastefield 1.5M when no team will offer that is stupidity. Bedard made 1M in 2011, ie. 

    And why is Wastefield at 3.75M all of sudden dropped down to your 1.5M................................. Yes, Inepstein is an idiot, and so will any Gm stupid enough to offer 1.5M to Wastefield.

    You are praying all other younger veterans find markets for more than 1 to 2M, just so you can sit in your chair and pridefully watch your fat hero waddle out and chase #201 for the Red Sox. Pitiful.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    It doesn't matter what Bedard made last year. Is he not a free agent? Someone will pay more than 1 million for a lefthanded kid with experience and upside.

    Bedard was a FA and settled for 1M for 2011. I understand Wastefield made 3.75M in 2011, but you must understand good ole boys and welfare contracts. Wastefield wouldn't get 1M guaranteed MLB contract on market unless Cherington is as stupid as InEpstein.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    Wakefield made some of the money in incentives. His base was not $3.75M. I would offer him $1.5M for 2012 or $1M with possibly some incentives based on GS'd, IP and effectiveness that could bring him to $2-2.5M, but first, I would try to get 2-3 better pitchers even if it means neglecting the DH, RF and catcher slots to some extent. If I knew what the payroll restrictions are, I'd have a better idea, but I am basing my assumptions on the fact that we have about $8M to spend and stay at about last year's numbers. If we sign Papi for $16M as softy wants to do, we'd probably have no money for the other needs, including pitching. That's where finding pitchers for about $1M comes into play. Wake is but one option in that category of pitchers. He'd probably be cheaper than Bedard, Francis, and Harden, and we may need to get 2 or 3 of these types of gusy even if we let Papi walk.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    If we sign Papi for $16M as softy wants to do

    I don't believe softlaw proposed more than 13.5 and one year, or 2 years and no more than 20M. You proposed 30M and 3 years. Pretty stupid, as no such market exists. 

    You are the same guy who wanted Lackey found for 5 years and 80 million plus.

    Wastefield and Varitek cost nearly 6 million in 2011. You offer them 3 to 4 million. You have zero crediblity. Red Sox can get 2 under 40 veteran bottom tier starters for that.

    You are completely off base on 2012 budget, but then want to dump 3 to 4 million or more in welfare money to Wastefield and Varitek, 2 40 plus parasites.

    When people advance the notion that 2 pitiful performing old men can't be replaced by younger and as cheap or cheaper men, this is why the Red Sox finish in 3rd place. 
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from moonslav59. Show moonslav59's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    If we sign Papi for $16M as softy wants to do

    I don't believe softlaw proposed more than 13.5 and one year, or 2 years and no more than 20M. 

    More lies.

    You proposed 30M and 3 years. Pretty stupid, as no such market exists. 

    I said $8M base per year with incentives that could bring him to $13M/yr and the 3rd year with a club $2M buyout. Get the facts straight just once, will you? Can you?

    Why not remind everyone how you called me a racist for wanting to offer Papi $8-9M base with incentives, then a month later you were offering the same, before recently spiking up to $13.5M then #16M/1 , now back to $13M.

    Here's my offer from the Papi thread...

    Re: David Ortiz Seeks Three-Year Deal

    posted at 11/28/2011 7:56 PM EST
    Posts: 20811
    First: 9/27/2005
    Last: 12/1/2011
    I'd offer...

    Year 1: Base $9M with easy incentives to reach $11M 
    and harder ones to reach $13M.

    Year 2 base $9M  same incentives as 2012.

    Year 3 base $8M (unless reached most incentives 
    in '12 and '13, then to $9M and same incentives 
    as 2012. Team Buyout for $2M.

    Minimum he could make: $20M/2 (including buyout)
    Maximum he could make: $28M/2 (including '14 buyout)
    or $39M/3.

    Sox4ever



    You are the same guy who wanted Lackey found for 5 years and 80 million plus.

    I never mentioned Lackey, because it was a total surprise. I had thought he'd get about $100M, and so never wanted him. After the surprise signing, we both said it was an overpay, but a good deal. The only difference is, I admit it-you don't.

    Wastefield and Varitek cost nearly 6 million in 2011. You offer them 3 to 4 million. You have zero crediblity. Red Sox can get 2 under 40 veteran bottom tier starters for that.

    How do you keep getting $3-4M from $1M to $1.5M each? Your continous lies gives you negative credibility.

    You are completely off base on 2012 budget, but then want to dump 3 to 4 million or more in welfare money to Wastefield and Varitek, 2 40 plus parasites.

    If we sign almost all of our arb cases, as we likely will, our payroll budget will be about $160M.

    Our 2011 budget was about $163M according to Cots and $166.7 according to baseball reference.

    Tell us why the numbers are wrong and we can afford to pay Papi $13.5M, Hernandez $4M, 3 x $1M starting pitchers, and $??? on releif pitcher(s) and stay under $167-168M

    When people advance the notion that 2 pitiful performing old men can't be replaced by younger and as cheap or cheaper men, this is why the Red Sox finish in 3rd place. 

    And this is why you want to trade Jake and sign old man Ramon, Papi and journeymen pitchers?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from hankwilliams. Show hankwilliams's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    I never mentioned Lackey, because it was a total surprise. I had thought he'd get about $100M, and so never wanted him

    Bad attempt to prevaricate. You drooled over Lackey at 80 million plus. I said it was terrible deal, beyond 3 years and 30 million. You prevaricate from my comment that of the big 3 FA that winter, as a pitcher, it was the only one that made any sense as team need at all.

    Hernandez is not an old man, on a one year contract. Take a look at his 2011 and career numbers. Now, Varitek is an old man, Wastefield is rest home material and your plan is to pay them 3 or 4 million.

    My plan is to sign Hernandez for 3 or 4 million, and trade Ellsbury and Lowrie and blocked prospects for a young slugging Rh OFer and a middle tier starting pitcher.

    Your plan is to pay Ellsbury 16 to 20 million for 2 more years and pay Wastefield and Varitek 3 or 4 million a year until they die.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from BurritoT. Show BurritoT's posts

    Re: Wakefield and Varitek

    In Response to Wakefield and Varitek:
    [QUOTE]My feelings are...   1-lets bring back Wakefield.....NOT as a starter (unless we have a ton of injuries)....when his knuckleball is on he is unhittable....when it's not on he is ineffective....so use him as an early to middle inning guy when we are behind....he is a proven "innings eater"....with our projected offense he could keep us in games we could eventually win.....otherwise he keeps the rest of the bullpen on the bench...and the arms are rested... 2-Varitek is a great guy to have on the bench and in the clubhouse.....give him a very limited role and groom his as a future coach.....I love the guy... I don't see any downside to this...
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    This post continues to make me laugh.
     
  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]I never mentioned Lackey, because it was a total surprise. I had thought he'd get about $100M, and so never wanted him Bad attempt to prevaricate. You drooled over Lackey at 80 million plus. I said it was terrible deal, beyond 3 years and 30 million. You prevaricate from my comment that of the big 3 FA that winter, as a pitcher, it was the only one that made any sense as team need at all. 

    No, you said the deal was one year too long, then after hearing about the injury clasue, you said he was overpaid, but it was a good deal. Stop your lies.

    Hernandez is not an old man, on a one year contract. Take a look at his 2011 and career numbers.

    Next year, Ramon will be the same age you started bashing VTek for being too old. His PB + WPs numbers (your stat to bash VTek with) was worse than VTek in 2011.

    Now, Varitek is an old man, Wastefield is rest home material and your plan is to pay them 3 or 4 million. My plan is to sign Hernandez for 3 or 4 million, and trade Ellsbury and Lowrie and blocked prospects for a young slugging Rh OFer and a middle tier starting pitcher. Your plan is to pay Ellsbury 16 to 20 million for 2 more years and pay Wastefield and Varitek 3 or 4 million a year until they die.
    Posted by hankwilliams[/QUOTE]

    Ramon was just signed...what next "genius'?

     

Share