Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to tomnev's comment:

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    I like and respect your takes on thing Max, but wasnt your last thread 1/2 hour ago basically the same thing as this?

    Peavys numbers last year were those of a legit #2 starter. Before the arm issues he was an ACE for a 5 year period. Then can the arm issues which Im sure inflated the ERA. he got that issue resolved and looked great last year. Slow start this year (not uncommon) then started to really pitch good again when the broken rib happened. He is insurance for a PO run.

    Buch is hurt, lackey not pitching last year and Doubie never pitching more than 161IP, both could hit a wall. Then factor in the possibility of another injury. Peavy was the best option on the market and it cost ius a player who, although a GG, was expendable with our depth.

    We could have got Norris, Feldman or Garza and given up a lot more. It was a smart move.

     



    With all due respect SP, I could not care less what Peavy did last year, or about the fact that he won a Cy Young six years ago. I care only about what he did recently (=this year) and what he does for the RED Sox.

     

     




    Pumpsie,

     

     

    Of course what he does for us is the only importan thing, but if the point of the Post was to jusdge whther it was a wise trade, you have to take history into account

     

     



    Yes you do have to take history into account, but how far back do you go? I say that the most important history is what a player has done recently, meaning THIS YEAR. Look at some of the stars who performed last year but who are not doing the job this year and vice versa. Players have good years and bad years. Beckett was a perfect example. In 2007 his ERA was 3.27, but a year earlier and later it was 5.01 and 4.23. Peavy is not having as good a year this year as last year, perhaps due to his injury. We are getting THIS YEAR'S VERSION of Peavy, not the 2007 or 2012 version.

     

     




    Unless we're talking about Lester, then we go back multiple years....

     

     

     



    You were wrong. You are exceptionally easy to ignore.

     

     



     

    Wrong about what?

    Are you saying you haven't use the "Lester hasn"t been good since 2011, so he wont be good going forward" line before?

    You used the same argument before, when you wanted Ortiz benched , after a bad start.

    "Only this year's numbers matter."

    I'm just curious why it doesn't apply to all players.

     



    You had said that I cannot ignore you...you were wrong. But since you have apparently decided to be civil, sure, we can talk. In regard to Lester or any other player its THIS YEAR's numbers that are most important to me. In fact, even more recent performance, say, over the last few months, is even more important. I am not going to discount last year, but they are less important than recent performance. The best predictor of future performance is recent past performance. I don't think thats really debateable.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Good to know...

     

     

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Lester can own it all he wants. I think thats just great. When all is said and done, he has not performed in about a year and half now. His ERA is 4.12 and 5.09 over his last 10 starts. It was 4.82 last year. He has pitched a total of FOUR good games this year, his first four, during which his ERA was 1.71. There is nothing to "straighten out". He is simply not very good any more.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     



    The way I see it he was an excellent starting pitching up until May 15th and until two weeks ago the team never lost when he pitched. You can't argue that. Now combine the first 6 weeks with the last 4 he has been solid to good but trending down. He is either hurt or it is mental, if it is mental after the game was a good sign. You can talk all about 3 and 4 and what but did you think Lester was going to win over 20 games like he was on pace to or 15-17 isn't going to be good enough for your second best starter?

     



    I guess you think all of last year is irrelevant. I don't.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    I like and respect your takes on thing Max, but wasnt your last thread 1/2 hour ago basically the same thing as this?

    Peavys numbers last year were those of a legit #2 starter. Before the arm issues he was an ACE for a 5 year period. Then can the arm issues which Im sure inflated the ERA. he got that issue resolved and looked great last year. Slow start this year (not uncommon) then started to really pitch good again when the broken rib happened. He is insurance for a PO run.

    Buch is hurt, lackey not pitching last year and Doubie never pitching more than 161IP, both could hit a wall. Then factor in the possibility of another injury. Peavy was the best option on the market and it cost ius a player who, although a GG, was expendable with our depth.

    We could have got Norris, Feldman or Garza and given up a lot more. It was a smart move.

     



    With all due respect SP, I could not care less what Peavy did last year, or about the fact that he won a Cy Young six years ago. I care only about what he did recently (=this year) and what he does for the RED Sox.

    That is ridiculously simplistic. You really judge players over half seasons instead of the players entire career?

    No wonder you thought the Red Sox season was over back in May. Good thing you don't make baseball decisions for anyone.

    Wow.

     

    [/QUOTE]


     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    I'm not sure I see the point in making a comparison to the team's ERA...the question is not whether he'll have a better ERA than Lackey or Doubront or anyone in the bullpen. With Buchholz's date of return unknown, the question is whether you're comfortable having a rotation spot basically up in the air for most or potentially all of the rest of the season.

    So, is Peavy an upgrade over Brandon Workman in the rotation? Maybe not the way Workman has pitched so far, but are we willing to gamble a playoff spot that he can keep that up? Webster has been a far more highly lauded prospect, and he got bombed. If Workman were to falter, who's next in line? Steven Wright? Aceves again?

    How many times have we thought we had enough pitching only to see it all fall apart?

    Peavy doesn't have to be Josh Beckett c.2007 to have value to this team. Even if he is only a MOTR starter (of which, yes, we already have several) from here on out, I'll take that over the unknown at this point...it beats wishing we'd made a move in a couple of weeks when one of our current guys goes on the DL, the rookies start struggling, or both.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    Peavy when healthy has pitched like a legit #2 for the vast majority of his career.  You can judge him for 80 innings then that's fine......all I know is Ben Charington agrees with me and he is smarter than you....and me. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    The team ERA is 3.78.  Peavy's ERA is 4.28, a half a run higher.  So the Sox are dumping a brilliant fielder in order to overpay a guy who is not a good bet to make the rotation better. 



    How soon can you leave?

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Iggy was not going to be our future SS anyway. Bogaerts will assume that role, most likely. Cecchini or WMB will take over at 3B. You don't get a player like Peavy for nothing; Iggy has value, but he plays at a position of organizational depth for the Red Sox. I don't necessarily trust Cherington, but I think that this was a decent trade.

     



    I guess that's the thinking. I only hope it's sound.

     

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to ZILLAGOD's comment:

     

    This is a "knee jerk" reaction to a first half that the ownership wasn't expecting. Now the rebuilding process is put on the back burner in a lame attempt to keep pace with Tampa Bay and the Orioles who have surpassed the Yankees and Red Sox in rebuilding from within. Toronto is heading down this road also, but the maturation progress was slowed by many injuries to young pitchers last year. In a nutshell, my feeling is along the lines of what Lloyd said. I would rather they kept on with the rebuilding process instead of giving false hope to RSN that they can win it all. Of course, the lacklustre Yankees and their problems opens the door for the Sox to try and throw their weight around, especially after shedding all the excess baggage last August. However, what I see is more "excess baggage" in Peavy, a 32 year old pitcher who is being touted as a mini-saviour, but in reality is a slighty ( and I do mean only slightly) above average pitcher. The only reason Peavy looks good, is that there is so many bad pitchers out there.

     

    "All the president is, is a glorified public relations man who spends his time flattering, kissing and kicking people to get them to do what they are supposed to do anyway." - Harry S. Truman

     




    Actually this post is a bit dramatic the other way. We gave up an all glove no bat SS in which we have 1 in AAA ready to go next year and another who will be in AA next year. Not sure how Iggy interupts the whole "rebuilding " process. Peavy is NOT being touted as even a mini savior, but good starting depth for a playoff run. It also indirectly helps our bullpen allowing Workman to be added to it.

     

    When your team has one of the best record in baseball after 110 games, the GM and ownership have an obligation to the organization and the fanbase to bolster the roster for  the final 2 months and a possible run deep into the playoffs.

    To compare the Sox trading Iggy for peavy to the jays clearing out the farm this past offseason is more closer the the "knee jerk" reaction you speak of.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I like and respect your takes on thing Max, but wasnt your last thread 1/2 hour ago basically the same thing as this?

    Peavys numbers last year were those of a legit #2 starter. Before the arm issues he was an ACE for a 5 year period. Then can the arm issues which Im sure inflated the ERA. he got that issue resolved and looked great last year. Slow start this year (not uncommon) then started to really pitch good again when the broken rib happened. He is insurance for a PO run.

    Buch is hurt, lackey not pitching last year and Doubie never pitching more than 161IP, both could hit a wall. Then factor in the possibility of another injury. Peavy was the best option on the market and it cost ius a player who, although a GG, was expendable with our depth.

    We could have got Norris, Feldman or Garza and given up a lot more. It was a smart move.

     

     



    With all due respect SP, I could not care less what Peavy did last year, or about the fact that he won a Cy Young six years ago. I care only about what he did recently (=this year) and what he does for the RED Sox.

     

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    His stats show that the ERA is inflated. His WHIP is extremely low for an ERA that high. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    So is his WAR. All of the deep statistics that measure how someone is really pitching show Peavy having outpitched anyone currently in the rotation. 


    That's because U.S. Cellular is the Cape Canaveral of baseball parks. The HR Park Factor is second only to Coors Field. When you give up fly balls in Chicago, they often turn into home runs that would otherwise not be. 

    He'll find mistakes to be a lot less costly in Fenway. His ERA will drop. 

    And to answer the thread ... the title is incorrect ... Peavy does make the staff better ... that's why. 

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    comparing the team ERA to PEAVY's in 80 games is highly misleading.  

    Clay was here for the first 2 months then gone.  You don't know what you will get from him.

    Lester has been day/night

    Lackey has been outstanding but coming off of a whole season off, he may break down. 

    Dempster has been meh and is old

    Doubront is also very young and never pitched above 180 innings

    So even if you think Peavy's era is going to continue to stay above his career norm when healthy....he still may be better than a lot of our options down the stretch. 

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    comparing the team ERA to PEAVY's in 80 games is highly misleading.  

    Clay was here for the first 2 months then gone.  You don't know what you will get from him.

    Lester has been day/night

    Lackey has been outstanding but coming off of a whole season off, he may break down. 

    Dempster has been meh and is old

    Doubront is also very young and never pitched above 180 innings

    So even if you think Peavy's era is going to continue to stay above his career norm when healthy....he still may be better than a lot of our options down the stretch. 




    actually its 161IP in MLB which was last year.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

     

    The team ERA is 3.78.  Peavy's ERA is 4.28, a half a run higher.  So the Sox are dumping a brilliant fielder in order to overpay a guy who is not a good bet to make the rotation better. 

     



    Hey Max,

     

    Guys like Peavy are hard to find at a bargain price because they have been consistantly better than the norm throughout their career.  Peavy has solid tools and doesn't let one bad game bother them, or have them frequently.  The WS at #29 are almost dead last in runs scored so chances are Jake might do even better W/L wise for us. 

    Clay hasn't come close to the consistency Peavy has throughout his career so give so lets give Peavy a chance because he has earned the respect.

    Peavy's career WHIP is 1.18  

    Garza who l also like is at 1.27 

    Clay is at 1.3 primarily do to this season and he can't even stay in our rotation so we needed help. Signing Dempster for 13mil was a waste of money for a #5 guy with a 1.43 career WHIP and his best years behind him.  We paid Wake 1/2mil for the same job.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better


    Southpaw777, what about the other part of the argument, that the Sox pitching right now, without Buchholz or Peavy, is actually pretty good?  Peavy can help, granted, but I just don't see the Sox pitching as broken or in dire straits.  The team ERA is almost identical, 3.78 vs. 3.76, to the Rays and the Sox play half their games at Fenway, a hitters park.  I cite the Rays because right now they are the primary competition for the best record in the AL. 

    I'm starting to think that dumping Iglesias was almost as beneficial to the team as acquiring Peavy.  At the least, I think Iglesias proved to be a lot more expendable than most of us--certainly me--thought.  Good field, no hit is the kiss of death at Fenway.  So, when the Tigers became interested in a three way trade in order to get a backup SS, the Sox were more than happy to let Iggy go and get some pitching insurance at the same time.  You can never have too much pitching, especially when you have plenty of SS's, almost all of whom hit better than Iglesias. 

    Again, to set the record straight.  the headline on this thread and the OP are exaggerations.  I used statistics to make a case I didn't really believe. 

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

    In response to ctredsoxfanhugh's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    comparing the team ERA to PEAVY's in 80 games is highly misleading.  

    Clay was here for the first 2 months then gone.  You don't know what you will get from him.

    Lester has been day/night

    Lackey has been outstanding but coming off of a whole season off, he may break down. 

    Dempster has been meh and is old

    Doubront is also very young and never pitched above 180 innings

    So even if you think Peavy's era is going to continue to stay above his career norm when healthy....he still may be better than a lot of our options down the stretch. 

     




    actually its 161IP in MLB which was last year.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's right only 161. I don't know why I thought it was 180.....but that just strengthens my point.  It made sense to go out and get some starting pitching. 

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    This deal is as much about the now as it is the future.  Peavy is not a rental, and while he cost the Sox Iglesias I like the fact that they got a middle-of-the-rotation guy at worst for a guy who a few months ago wasn't worth much in the trade market.  It's not like they don't have Drew, Bogaerts and a few other SS prospects in the minors to fall back on, either. 



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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:


    Southpaw777, what about the other part of the argument, that the Sox pitching right now, without Buchholz or Peavy, is actually pretty good?  Peavy can help, granted, but I just don't see the Sox pitching as broken or in dire straits.  The team ERA is almost identical, 3.78 vs. 3.76, to the Rays and the Sox play half their games at Fenway, a hitters park.  I cite the Rays because right now they are the primary competition for the best record in the AL. 

    I'm starting to think that dumping Iglesias was almost as beneficial to the team as acquiring Peavy.  At the least, I think Iglesias proved to be a lot more expendable than most of us--certainly me--thought.  Good field, no hit is the kiss of death at Fenway.  So, when the Tigers became interested in a three way trade in order to get a backup SS, the Sox were more than happy to let Iggy go and get some pitching insurance at the same time.  You can never have too much pitching, especially when you have plenty of SS's, almost all of whom hit better than Iglesias. 

    Again, to set the record straight.  the headline on this thread and the OP are exaggerations.  I used statistics to make a case I didn't really believe. 



    It's not about being equal to your competition.  In our division you need to be a bit better and we got a solid veteran pitcher who has been more consistent than any pitcher on the staff so I'm certainly not complaining.  We also need to solve the David Price/hitting lefties issue and replace De La Torre with Workman ASAP.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:

    This deal is as much about the now as it is the future.  Peavy is not a rental, and while he cost the Sox Iglesias I like the fact that they got a middle-of-the-rotation guy at worst for a guy who a few months ago wasn't worth much in the trade market.  It's not like they don't have Drew, Bogaerts and a few other SS prospects in the minors to fall back on, either. 





    I agree, the fact Peavy isn't just a rental alone makes this deal a steal for Iglesias.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to ADG's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

    I like and respect your takes on thing Max, but wasnt your last thread 1/2 hour ago basically the same thing as this?

    Peavys numbers last year were those of a legit #2 starter. Before the arm issues he was an ACE for a 5 year period. Then can the arm issues which Im sure inflated the ERA. he got that issue resolved and looked great last year. Slow start this year (not uncommon) then started to really pitch good again when the broken rib happened. He is insurance for a PO run.

    Buch is hurt, lackey not pitching last year and Doubie never pitching more than 161IP, both could hit a wall. Then factor in the possibility of another injury. Peavy was the best option on the market and it cost ius a player who, although a GG, was expendable with our depth.

    We could have got Norris, Feldman or Garza and given up a lot more. It was a smart move.

     

     



    With all due respect SP, I could not care less what Peavy did last year, or about the fact that he won a Cy Young six years ago. I care only about what he did recently (=this year) and what he does for the RED Sox.

     

     




    He had a 2.97ERA before he stared dealing with the rib injury, then had 2 bad games where he was removed after 2IP of the 2nd game. That blew up his ERA. Hes pitched OK since coming back after a month and a half. But I didnt expect him to come out blazing after doing absolutely nothing for almost 2 months with a broken rib.

     

    Imnot trying to make him out to be an ace, but hes better than the mid 4ERA max is posting.

     

     



    I think they all count-all the games. How he will perform once he rounds back into shape is anyone's guess. And how much the injury had to do with his two bad games is also a matter of conjecture. My guess is that he will be like Dempster and Lester-decent, but not more than a #3 at best-which is all we really need if CB decides he wants to pitch again.

     

     




    Thats pretty much how I see him as a 2-3 starter with around a 3.50ERA

     

     



    The 3.50 number is yours. I said he would be like Dempster and Lester, who are #3 SP AT BEST with ERAs of 4.24 and 4.27 respectively. You have more confidence in him than I do.

     

     



    Pumpsie - Did the Red Sox get the best or second best starter traded at the deadline? Yes.
    Did they improve their rotation? Yes. His WHIP is sub 1.20, his K:BB ratio is 4.5:1, his numbers were inflated due to US Cellular field and the LHB home runs he gave up which he won't give up as much in Fenway.

     

    You wouldn't be happy with Cliff Lee.



    No, I would not have been happy with Cliff Lee because it would have cost an arm and a leg to get him and keep him here. I think you misunderstand my position on this: I agree with the trade. To compare his Cellular Field numbers use ERA+, and when you do that you will see that he is identical to that of Lester and Dempster. Thats the kind of pitcher we got IMO, not an ace or even a #2 SP. We got another #3 and in doing so allowed Workman to go to the bullpen and help. I would have preferred an established excellent RHRP to Peavy, but this ain't bad. Again, our season all depends on if Breakholz decides to pitch again.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to ThefourBs's comment:

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to tomnev's comment:

     

     

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

    I like and respect your takes on thing Max, but wasnt your last thread 1/2 hour ago basically the same thing as this?

    Peavys numbers last year were those of a legit #2 starter. Before the arm issues he was an ACE for a 5 year period. Then can the arm issues which Im sure inflated the ERA. he got that issue resolved and looked great last year. Slow start this year (not uncommon) then started to really pitch good again when the broken rib happened. He is insurance for a PO run.

    Buch is hurt, lackey not pitching last year and Doubie never pitching more than 161IP, both could hit a wall. Then factor in the possibility of another injury. Peavy was the best option on the market and it cost ius a player who, although a GG, was expendable with our depth.

    We could have got Norris, Feldman or Garza and given up a lot more. It was a smart move.

     



    With all due respect SP, I could not care less what Peavy did last year, or about the fact that he won a Cy Young six years ago. I care only about what he did recently (=this year) and what he does for the RED Sox.

     

     




    Pumpsie,

     

     

    Of course what he does for us is the only importan thing, but if the point of the Post was to jusdge whther it was a wise trade, you have to take history into account

     

     



    Yes you do have to take history into account, but how far back do you go? I say that the most important history is what a player has done recently, meaning THIS YEAR. Look at some of the stars who performed last year but who are not doing the job this year and vice versa. Players have good years and bad years. Beckett was a perfect example. In 2007 his ERA was 3.27, but a year earlier and later it was 5.01 and 4.23. Peavy is not having as good a year this year as last year, perhaps due to his injury. We are getting THIS YEAR'S VERSION of Peavy, not the 2007 or 2012 version.

     

     




    Unless we're talking about Lester, then we go back multiple years....

     

     

     



    You were wrong. You are exceptionally easy to ignore.

     

     



     

    Wrong about what?

    Are you saying you haven't use the "Lester hasn"t been good since 2011, so he wont be good going forward" line before?

    You used the same argument before, when you wanted Ortiz benched , after a bad start.

    "Only this year's numbers matter."

    I'm just curious why it doesn't apply to all players.

     

     



    You had said that I cannot ignore you...you were wrong. But since you have apparently decided to be civil, sure, we can talk. In regard to Lester or any other player its THIS YEAR's numbers that are most important to me. In fact, even more recent performance, say, over the last few months, is even more important. I am not going to discount last year, but they are less important than recent performance. The best predictor of future performance is recent past performance. I don't think thats really debateable.

     

     



    Good to know...

     

     

     

    In response to BosoxJoe5's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    Lester can own it all he wants. I think thats just great. When all is said and done, he has not performed in about a year and half now. His ERA is 4.12 and 5.09 over his last 10 starts. It was 4.82 last year. He has pitched a total of FOUR good games this year, his first four, during which his ERA was 1.71. There is nothing to "straighten out". He is simply not very good any more.

    WE ARE ALL JUST POPPYSEEDS IN THE BAKERY OF LIFE

     



    The way I see it he was an excellent starting pitching up until May 15th and until two weeks ago the team never lost when he pitched. You can't argue that. Now combine the first 6 weeks with the last 4 he has been solid to good but trending down. He is either hurt or it is mental, if it is mental after the game was a good sign. You can talk all about 3 and 4 and what but did you think Lester was going to win over 20 games like he was on pace to or 15-17 isn't going to be good enough for your second best starter?

     



    I guess you think all of last year is irrelevant. I don't.



    Lets simplify it for you: if a player's performance is consistent for a year and a half its reasonable to assume that that kind of performance will continue. It might not, but if I were asked how a player would do over the next few months given that circumstance my response would be that his performance would be like the past 18 months. Best guess, call it. Now if a player did great last year, but since April of this year he has not performed well at all (or vice versa), which body of work would you use to try to predict his performance over the next couple of months-this year's or last year's?

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to 37stories's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to southpaw777's comment:

     

     

    I like and respect your takes on thing Max, but wasnt your last thread 1/2 hour ago basically the same thing as this?

    Peavys numbers last year were those of a legit #2 starter. Before the arm issues he was an ACE for a 5 year period. Then can the arm issues which Im sure inflated the ERA. he got that issue resolved and looked great last year. Slow start this year (not uncommon) then started to really pitch good again when the broken rib happened. He is insurance for a PO run.

    Buch is hurt, lackey not pitching last year and Doubie never pitching more than 161IP, both could hit a wall. Then factor in the possibility of another injury. Peavy was the best option on the market and it cost ius a player who, although a GG, was expendable with our depth.

    We could have got Norris, Feldman or Garza and given up a lot more. It was a smart move.

     

     



    With all due respect SP, I could not care less what Peavy did last year, or about the fact that he won a Cy Young six years ago. I care only about what he did recently (=this year)and what he does for the RED Sox.

     

    That is ridiculously simplistic. You really judge players over half seasons instead of the players entire career?

    No wonder you thought the Red Sox season was over back in May. Good thing you don't make baseball decisions for anyone.

    Wow.

     




     




    Wow is right. You near complete lack of ability to understand the written language of English or inability to comprehend basic logic has once again been presented, front and center. Read my last post to TheFourB's for a more simplistic explanation that someone of your limited intellectual capabilities might be able to comprehend.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to jackbu's comment:

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    The team ERA is 3.78.  Peavy's ERA is 4.28, a half a run higher.  So the Sox are dumping a brilliant fielder in order to overpay a guy who is not a good bet to make the rotation better. 

     




    I've listened to the pros and cons on the deal since it was done.  The bottom line is only time will tell.  If Peavy throws up and is a bust, then the sox made a huge mistake.  It is as simple as that.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The thing about that argument (and I generally agree with it) is that is the bottom line of all trades and noboday has a cyrstal ball.  That's why I think it's wrong to judge a GM for a few bad trades; and a few good trades.  Rather they should be judged by the outcome of all their decisions over a long period of time.  I for one hope Peavy gets pumped coming to Boston and stays healhty.....if he does good things will happen. 

     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:


    Southpaw777, what about the other part of the argument, that the Sox pitching right now, without Buchholz or Peavy, is actually pretty good?  Peavy can help, granted, but I just don't see the Sox pitching as broken or in dire straits.  The team ERA is almost identical, 3.78 vs. 3.76, to the Rays and the Sox play half their games at Fenway, a hitters park.  I cite the Rays because right now they are the primary competition for the best record in the AL. 

    I'm starting to think that dumping Iglesias was almost as beneficial to the team as acquiring Peavy.  At the least, I think Iglesias proved to be a lot more expendable than most of us--certainly me--thought.  Good field, no hit is the kiss of death at Fenway.  So, when the Tigers became interested in a three way trade in order to get a backup SS, the Sox were more than happy to let Iggy go and get some pitching insurance at the same time.  You can never have too much pitching, especially when you have plenty of SS's, almost all of whom hit better than Iglesias. 

    Again, to set the record straight.  the headline on this thread and the OP are exaggerations.  I used statistics to make a case I didn't really believe. 



    I agree, the pitching has been good without Buch.
    Like I said Max, Peavy is good insurance. Id rather have him start in the playoffs than Dempster or maybe even Doubie depending on if he runs out of gas, hence the insurance Peavy brings. Lackey has been good this year for sure. But his last 2-3 games hes had some issues. Heck, Buchholz could have more issues. It could be nothing, but Id rather be safe than sorry with our pitching.

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    The team ERA is 3.78.  Peavy's ERA is 4.28, a half a run higher.  So the Sox are dumping a brilliant fielder in order to overpay a guy who is not a good bet to make the rotation better. 




    If he didn't try to pitch with a broken rib - a true dirt dog move if there ever was one - and get blown up in a game for it (2,2 innings and 6 runs or something ...) his ERA would be below 3.95.

     

     

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

    Re: Why Peavy? He will make this pitching staff worse, not better

    In response to maxbialystock's comment:

    The team ERA is 3.78.  Peavy's ERA is 4.28, a half a run higher.  So the Sox are dumping a brilliant fielder in order to overpay a guy who is not a good bet to make the rotation better. 



    Once again, all that matters to you is a specific sample size and only a specific stat.

    Peavy is better than Dempster.

    Lackey and Doubront will need some rest soon.

    Our pen needs a long man.

    The trade made us better in pitching, but worse on defense.

     

Share