We don't need Peavey

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

    We don't need Peavey

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to jader's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

    [/QUOTE]


    March 2 -- I guess it's never too early to start ripping players.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from jader. Show jader's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to JoseLaguna's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Jader, may I ask you a personal question? Are you a RS fan or a rival fan? Of course, you can keep playing your game and ignore the question.

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    I've been a RS fan for 60 years, does that suffice?

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to FajitaT's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I don't know if you realize you might have mispelled your name... it was meant to be jaded? Correct?

    [/QUOTE]


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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    Ha ha, Jader it is.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from one-for-the-road. Show one-for-the-road's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    really? does the original poster thinks they have too much pitching?

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    "I've been a RS fan for 60 years, does that suffice?"

    From the outside, it doens't seem like an especially happy marriage. 

    Curious: how is he blocking other younger pitchers when he is injured? 

    I abide by the cliche you can never have enough pitching. With Dempster gone we can use Peavy.

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to jader's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

    [/QUOTE]

    Over the hill? Hardly.

    Too expensive? For some teams, not the Sox

    Best days are far and in the rear view mirroW? Not sure that I completely understand your use of the English language with this statement. 

    Helped us in 13. I agree, he should also help us in 14.

    he's blocking young talant from taking the mound now. That's one way of looking at it. Another is he's allowing the Sox the luxary to not rush them out of nessecity...

    get rid of him. Not sure that Farrel or Cherinton share your sentiments, nor do I...

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from craze4sox. Show craze4sox's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to jader's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

    [/QUOTE]

    Peavy should have another solid season and we definateley need him so lets stop worrying about a cut on his hand and enjoy the season.  None of our kids are better than any of our starters just yet so hes not blocking anyone.  Having Peavy, Lester, Buccholz, Doubrobt and Lackey in our starting rotation should keep us in the race again.

    We will make a trade when and if necessary.

     

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    You never ever trade away pitching depth going into the season.  EVER.  Or at least you shouldn't, and I find solace in knowing the Sox likely won't.

    You see what happens when you bring up prospects, no prospect is a sure thing and no matter how hyped they are they can fail and often even when they do succeed sometimes it take a while.

    Instantaneous success is a rarity in Baseball.

    We talk about all these guys; Ranuado, Owens, Barnes, Webster, RDLR + and while I think most of those guys will pan out there is very little guarantee any of them will hit the ground running.  It isn't even a safe bet that Workman wouldn't struggle and show some adversity this year.  

    This is why Ben C. goes out and gets a Capuano, and keeps a Peavy.  Especially with Dempster gone and Wright (probably one of your first call up options) on the D.L.  That's two pitchers down already.

    At this point there is ZERO chance the Sox get rid of a pitcher. 

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hammah29r2. Show Hammah29r2's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to jader's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

    [/QUOTE]
    I'll make this short and sweet. We can agree to disagree here pal. I happen to love Peavy's fire and passion and how he handles himself when he has the ball. I also think that he and AJ are gonna be a great combo together with their approach to how to play the game.  You got me by a couple of years jader as far as being a sox fan is concerned. I've only been one since 1955.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from southpaw777. Show southpaw777's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    For a fan of 60 years I would think you would understand the need for pitching. Peavy is what? 32? Lackey had a solid year at 35 Last year. Depth is what got us over some injuries and underperformance last year And you want to deplete our staff who is already down 2 pitchers?

    disagree. Peavy isnt, nor should he, go anywhere at this point in time.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to southpaw777's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    For a fan of 60 years I would think you would understand the need for pitching. Peavy is what? 32? Lackey had a solid year at 35 Last year. Depth is what got us over some injuries and underperformance last year And you want to deplete our staff who is already down 2 pitchers?

    disagree. Peavy isnt, nor should he, go anywhere at this point in time.

    [/QUOTE]

    everybody saw what happened to the Yankees last year.  It's not so much that the old guys couldn't produce, it was they could get on the field.  While age may slightly increase the chance of injury youth doesn't exactly secure anything.

    Anyone can get hit with the injury bug, depth is and was our biggest strength last year and was a large contributing factor to our run. 

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    This ideal that the "young talent" will come up and immediately contribute is a fallacy.  We see way way way more often than not that guys struggle when they come up and take time to adjust.  Actually can anyone remember the last time a pitcher came up and hit the ground running for the Sox???? I know there are a few, but my point is more often than not guys struggle.  Even future all stars likely struggle....this is why MLB ready, proven depth are valuable to the team.

    Yes...we need Peavey....and Capuano. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    need them for depth........okay you drop Peavey...who replaces him with some experience? what if the young arm you bring up can't cut it?...what is your Plan B?

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    Let us revisit in, say, June.  At this moment, we need Jake Peavey.  

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    Dear jader

    Relax, watch the games, enjoy yourself, and leave the personnel decisions to Benny Boy. 

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

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to jader's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

    [/QUOTE]

    How is he "blocking" young talent from taking the mound now??? Is there any reason to believe Workman would be better than Peavy in 14? 

    Peavy is a former #1 who if healthy is still a middle of the rotation starter.  Workman, while impressive ultimately finished the season at 4.98 and 1.4 WHIP, while most scouts agree his place is the bullpen.

    Barnes and Ranuado have barely pitched above AA, Webster struggled in his MLb debut and probably needs more seasoning, and at least needs to prove himself with a consistent stretch of dominance before he gets another callup.

    So what prospect? is MLB ready to take the mound and compete in the ALE and give us something better than what Peavy will likely give us in 2014???

    Because to say so is pure speculation, you don't bulid a championship defending team on guesses and speculation.  If those guys produce they will force their way into the rotation.  If you are wrong and Ben C. got rid of him, then what?

    Lets say we never signed Capuano and we traded away Peavy and Barnes and Ranuado look like Webster in his first MLB stint...then what?  What is the plan B? 

    Anybody who has been in here long enough knows I'm probably one of the biggest prospect homers in here and even I recognize the important of depth, and player development.  This was a huge area of strength for the Sox, and is even stronger this year.  If we do defend, or go far in the postseason (or even get there) it will be from this strength....I'm not throwing all that away and banking on the prospects hitting the ground running and the rest of the staff sustaining no injuries...that would be unwise. 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Iceman4. Show Iceman4's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey


     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Hammah29r2. Show Hammah29r2's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to Bill-806's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jader's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    He's over the hill and too expensive, best days are far in the rear view mirrow. He helped us in'13 but he's blocking young talent from taking the mound now - get rid of him.

    [/QUOTE]CONCUR  !!!!!    Me thinks that he would rather be FISHING  !!!!   Maybe he can go with Forrest, FORREST GUMP & Jenny, JENNY DELL !!!


    [/QUOTE]

    well ol seadawg maybe you might think about this little tidbit I heard this morning. You and jadar want to see Jake released which you are both entitled to your own opinions. however, that said, I heard on WEEI this morning that the Oriholes are actually looking at one totally over the hill Johan Santana as a possible pitching prospect. I guess he pitched a side session for those guys and actually topped out at a flaming 81 mph on the gun.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from garyhow. Show garyhow's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    NEVER enough pitching!!!!!!

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Ice-Cream. Show Ice-Cream's posts

    Re: We don't need Peavey

    In response to garyhow's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    NEVER enough pitching!!!!!!

    [/QUOTE]

    I wish you would have told me before I traded Arroyo for Willy Mo Pena.   :(

    --Theo Epstein

     

Share