HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Red Sox/MLB 2012 Thread Part XX-Time for Rebuilding

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2012, 08:10 PM
  #651
robert terwilliger
the bart, the
 
robert terwilliger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: sw florida
Country: United States
Posts: 20,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Twisted Tales View Post
That's why I said the Nats former ace. He's not a top 3 pitcher in the rotation, but he was technically their 'ace.' Anyways, he would be a decent 5th starter. Won't cost much.
this doesn't make sense.

my issue is the language you use. an "ace" pitcher is verlander, strasburg, felix, sabathia etc. guys who are more or less head and shoulders above the field on any given night.

john lannan has never been the "ace" of the nationals. throwing out 2007 when he pitched 34 innings, in 2008 he was their best starting pitcher but that is not an "ace". it's a default measure of "aw hell, we're probably going to win 59 games this year, better throw that 23 year old lefty out there". lannan was not much of an "ace" in 2008. he didn't throw 200 innings, he had a 1.6 k/bb and he was just a generally average pitcher. was he the best on the team? sure. does that make him a "nationals ace"? no. it makes him a good pitcher on a ****** team.

he got worse in 2009, throwing over 200 innings and seeing his k/bb drop and almost walk as many as he struck out. is that an "ace"? or in 2010 when he was demoted to double a? 2011 when he pitched above league average w/r/t era+ but still saw his k/bb drop? or this past year when he failed to crack a nationals rotation that saw chien-ming wang make five starts?

i realize that this seems like piling on. he got knocked around a bit after the nationals used him to fill in for strasburg. but at this point, he'd basically be a "hey, we have this guy we're going to do nothing with...want him for lannan?" kind of trade since lannan is likely headed to non-tender status. he's the kind of pitcher that a ****** team like the twins will pick up and hope to flip into something decent. he won't help the red sox. his hr/fb % was above league average pitching in a middle-of-the-road to neutral pitcher's park in dc.

he's just not a good pitcher.







and the lackey comparison was just me ****ing around during a boring work conference call.

robert terwilliger is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 09:03 PM
  #652
MioneRask134
Queen in the North
 
MioneRask134's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hogwarts-617
Country: United States
Posts: 12,663
vCash: 500
On Hamilton, I wouldn't give him any more than 3 years with an option for a 4th.

MioneRask134 is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 09:25 PM
  #653
Bruwinz37
Registered User
 
Bruwinz37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mione134 View Post
On Hamilton, I wouldn't give him any more than 3 years with an option for a 4th.
I would go 4 on him. A middle of the order of Hamilton, WMB, Ortiz would make me happy.

Ellsbury needs to be dealt but that may have to wait until the deadline where you can get 2-3 top prospects.

I would, for sure, deal Lester for Myers.

Bruwinz37 is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 09:29 PM
  #654
bruinswincup
Black&Gold4ever!!!!!
 
bruinswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 1,784
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to bruinswincup Send a message via Skype™ to bruinswincup
Myers, Hamilton, Ortiz, WMB, Bogaerts, JBJ in 2014 sounds good to me.

bruinswincup is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 09:40 PM
  #655
Kelly23
Pedroia and Drew
 
Kelly23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 5,477
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruinswincup View Post
Myers, Hamilton, Ortiz, WMB, Bogaerts, JBJ in 2014 sounds good to me.
Ortiz should be a 20-25 homer 85 Rbi guy by then and who knows he might just drop of a cliff before or durring 2014, He is not a sure thing but if he is still productive protected by Hamilton behind him maybe he will still put up big numbers but he is not a for sure guy in 2014

Kelly23 is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 09:49 PM
  #656
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert terwilliger View Post
this doesn't make sense.

my issue is the language you use. an "ace" pitcher is verlander, strasburg, felix, sabathia etc. guys who are more or less head and shoulders above the field on any given night.

john lannan has never been the "ace" of the nationals. throwing out 2007 when he pitched 34 innings, in 2008 he was their best starting pitcher but that is not an "ace". it's a default measure of "aw hell, we're probably going to win 59 games this year, better throw that 23 year old lefty out there". lannan was not much of an "ace" in 2008. he didn't throw 200 innings, he had a 1.6 k/bb and he was just a generally average pitcher. was he the best on the team? sure. does that make him a "nationals ace"? no. it makes him a good pitcher on a ****** team.

he got worse in 2009, throwing over 200 innings and seeing his k/bb drop and almost walk as many as he struck out. is that an "ace"? or in 2010 when he was demoted to double a? 2011 when he pitched above league average w/r/t era+ but still saw his k/bb drop? or this past year when he failed to crack a nationals rotation that saw chien-ming wang make five starts?

i realize that this seems like piling on. he got knocked around a bit after the nationals used him to fill in for strasburg. but at this point, he'd basically be a "hey, we have this guy we're going to do nothing with...want him for lannan?" kind of trade since lannan is likely headed to non-tender status. he's the kind of pitcher that a ****** team like the twins will pick up and hope to flip into something decent. he won't help the red sox. his hr/fb % was above league average pitching in a middle-of-the-road to neutral pitcher's park in dc.

he's just not a good pitcher.







and the lackey comparison was just me ****ing around during a boring work conference call.
Lannan is one of those average journeyman inning eating starters that bounce around the league, no one really desperate to own or keep them but they are worth a shot for any team when they happen to have an empty slot.

Guess what.

We have an empty slot.

Oh and he's 28. Not exactly decripit. I'd consider him a good analogue with Jeremy Guthrie actually.

Dojji* is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:47 AM
  #657
kman22
Registered User
 
kman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by robert terwilliger View Post
this doesn't make sense.

my issue is the language you use. an "ace" pitcher is verlander, strasburg, felix, sabathia etc. guys who are more or less head and shoulders above the field on any given night.

john lannan has never been the "ace" of the nationals. throwing out 2007 when he pitched 34 innings, in 2008 he was their best starting pitcher but that is not an "ace". it's a default measure of "aw hell, we're probably going to win 59 games this year, better throw that 23 year old lefty out there". lannan was not much of an "ace" in 2008. he didn't throw 200 innings, he had a 1.6 k/bb and he was just a generally average pitcher. was he the best on the team? sure. does that make him a "nationals ace"? no. it makes him a good pitcher on a ****** team.

he got worse in 2009, throwing over 200 innings and seeing his k/bb drop and almost walk as many as he struck out. is that an "ace"? or in 2010 when he was demoted to double a? 2011 when he pitched above league average w/r/t era+ but still saw his k/bb drop? or this past year when he failed to crack a nationals rotation that saw chien-ming wang make five starts?

i realize that this seems like piling on. he got knocked around a bit after the nationals used him to fill in for strasburg. but at this point, he'd basically be a "hey, we have this guy we're going to do nothing with...want him for lannan?" kind of trade since lannan is likely headed to non-tender status. he's the kind of pitcher that a ****** team like the twins will pick up and hope to flip into something decent. he won't help the red sox. his hr/fb % was above league average pitching in a middle-of-the-road to neutral pitcher's park in dc.

he's just not a good pitcher.







and the lackey comparison was just me ****ing around during a boring work conference call.
I think the joke was lost on you this time. Obviously Lannan has never been a true ace, but nationals staff was so bad that he was their best pitcher, or their "ace".

kman22 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 11:13 AM
  #658
Twisted Tales
H.A.M.
 
Twisted Tales's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,578
vCash: 2598
Quote:
Originally Posted by kman22 View Post
I think the joke was lost on you this time. Obviously Lannan has never been a true ace, but nationals staff was so bad that he was their best pitcher, or their "ace".
That was my point. He's not considered "hot" stuff by any means, but as a fifth starter in Boston I don't think it would be bad. It wouldn't cost us a thing. Plus, he's still young.

Twisted Tales is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 11:29 AM
  #659
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
The real point here is that we DEFINITELY had worse starters than John Lannan at many points in Boston last year. Adding him to the mix is unstupid. Refusing to add him to the mix because he isn't Randy Johnson in his prime is not unstupid.

Dojji* is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 12:01 PM
  #660
Shaun
Registered User
 
Shaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,118
vCash: 500
I just watched 30 seconds of Christmas at Fenway and i'm pretty sure I just got Aids

Shaun is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 12:14 PM
  #661
JRull86
Formerly Guiledoom
 
JRull86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The Bing, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,872
vCash: 500
Can someone please explain why you would trade Lester for a prospect, even if that prospect is Myers?

This team does not need offense, it needs pitching, namely starting pitching. Lester had a mediocre year, but the fact is, he's a #2 LHP. You don't deal that away for an OF prospect period. It's not like Lester is 34 or something, he's 29 and still under contract for 2 more seasons.

JRull86 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 12:31 PM
  #662
MioneRask134
Queen in the North
 
MioneRask134's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hogwarts-617
Country: United States
Posts: 12,663
vCash: 500
^ people tend to forget he's still our ace pitcher. While he had one bad year, everyone did as well. You keep him to see if he bounces back with Farrell. You don't trade a guy like that.


Especially with a guy who's stats are inflated due to playing in the PCL.

MioneRask134 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 12:32 PM
  #663
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRull86 View Post
Can someone please explain why you would trade Lester for a prospect, even if that prospect is Myers?.
Emotions. Lester is "part of the losing" and Myers is exciting and new. There is literally no other reason. There is nothing rational about this.

Dojji* is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 12:35 PM
  #664
N o o d l e s
Registered User
 
N o o d l e s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,418
vCash: 500
Jair Jurrjens is a free agent now. Would like to see the Sox offer him a deal.

N o o d l e s is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 01:02 PM
  #665
BMC
PerJohan Axelsson
 
BMC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Northeastern CT
Country: United States
Posts: 23,528
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bruinswincup View Post
get rid of sweet caroline all together, that crap is cringe worthy
Amen. Time for something better. Not that it would take much to beat that crap.

BMC is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 01:08 PM
  #666
Dojji*
Fight the Hate
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 16,821
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by N O O D L E S View Post
Jair Jurrjens is a free agent now. Would like to see the Sox offer him a deal.
I could see him being worth a "flyer."

Dojji* is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 01:34 PM
  #667
kman22
Registered User
 
kman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dojji View Post
Emotions. Lester is "part of the losing" and Myers is exciting and new. There is literally no other reason. There is nothing rational about this.
Disagree completely. They are at least a year, maybe even 2-3 years, away from contending for a title. Lester can leave in 2 years, so you'd be swapping a guy who can help you on his own while your team struggles for a guy that can be a key piece to your team for 6 years while they contend. If you hang onto Lester to the point where he can leave, like ellsbury can next winter, all you get is a supplementary pick that is a few more years off. I'm not sure how that's based on emotion.

kman22 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 01:37 PM
  #668
kman22
Registered User
 
kman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,686
vCash: 500
Also, they have had success developing pitchers (lester, buchholz, doubront, papelbon) and no luck at all developing a legit power hitter. Myers helps in that department.

kman22 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 01:40 PM
  #669
MioneRask134
Queen in the North
 
MioneRask134's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Hogwarts-617
Country: United States
Posts: 12,663
vCash: 500
^ his numbers are inflated. PCL does that.

I'll take our guy Sands over him.

MioneRask134 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 01:59 PM
  #670
Bruwinz37
Registered User
 
Bruwinz37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mione134 View Post
^ his numbers are inflated. PCL does that.

I'll take our guy Sands over him.
You have no issue with his "inflated" PCL stats? Just Myers? Fwiw Myers matched Sands best season OPS-wise at 21 (Sands was 23) at AAA.

Bruwinz37 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 02:00 PM
  #671
Bruwinz37
Registered User
 
Bruwinz37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRull86 View Post
Can someone please explain why you would trade Lester for a prospect, even if that prospect is Myers?

This team does not need offense, it needs pitching, namely starting pitching. Lester had a mediocre year, but the fact is, he's a #2 LHP. You don't deal that away for an OF prospect period. It's not like Lester is 34 or something, he's 29 and still under contract for 2 more seasons.
Not sure the Sox have a shot with or without Lester in the next two years. Rather have an every day, almost surefire stud corner OF and control for 6 years. In two years you then have to decide what to do with Lester. Tough decision if he doesnt come back strong.

Bruwinz37 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 02:21 PM
  #672
kman22
Registered User
 
kman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mione134 View Post
^ his numbers are inflated. PCL does that.

I'll take our guy Sands over him.
You might be alone there.

Myers put up similar numbers to Anthony Rizzo, albeit in more games. Rizzo is a year older, and both were in the same league. Would you take Sands over Rizzo?

kman22 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 02:43 PM
  #673
bruinswincup
Black&Gold4ever!!!!!
 
bruinswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: New Hampshire
Country: United States
Posts: 1,784
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to bruinswincup Send a message via Skype™ to bruinswincup
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mione134 View Post
^ his numbers are inflated. PCL does that.

I'll take our guy Sands over him.


just look at his #'s outside of the PCL. Taking Sands over him is a joke.

bruinswincup is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 03:21 PM
  #674
UNB Bruins Fan
Registered User
 
UNB Bruins Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,622
vCash: 500
Any interest in adding Reynolds...he was non-tendered by Baltimore...would bring some power (and a ton of strikeouts) to the line-up...and by all accounts he plays decent D at first.

UNB Bruins Fan is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 03:40 PM
  #675
kman22
Registered User
 
kman22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 1,686
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNB Bruins Fan View Post
Any interest in adding Reynolds...he was non-tendered by Baltimore...would bring some power (and a ton of strikeouts) to the line-up...and by all accounts he plays decent D at first.
Yes, but beyond his power, he doesn't offer much offensively. I personally would be focused on guys that are willing to take a 1-2 year deal, and from there, try to pick the most talented guys. A platoon of him and Pena would be pretty productive at first. Not average wise, but that'd be a power bat every day, no matter who is starting.

kman22 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:21 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.