Kotchman to the Mariners?

[Imperial59]

Wang and Burnett were much closer than Lester and DiceK were. Hence why you could make a strong argument that Wang was our #2 last yr. No chance you could make that argument about DiceK.

 

Wang was not in any way the #2 starter. End of story. To claim otherwise is deceitful.

[Dipre]

Wang was not in any way the #2 starter. End of story. To claim otherwise is deceitful.

 

He hyped him as the #2 starter, and as an ace,so in his mind, he was.

[Imperial59]

Wang and Burnett were much closer than Lester and DiceK were. Hence why you could make a strong argument that Wang was our #2 last yr. No chance you could make that argument about DiceK.

 

That's just because Lester's much better than Burnett. Matsuzaka has better stats than Wang. So to claim that Wang was a more legit #2 starter has no validity.

[Imperial59]

You're wrong on Wang's regression. Wang actually put up his best OPS against and his best K rate in 2008.

 

So you found to incredibly obscure stats and judged his entire performance on that? Wow, that's just sad. Keep picking those cherries homer.

[yankees228]

Wang was never projected as a #2 starter. That's just silly. He saw significant regression in 2008' date=' and missed most of the season. To say he was the projected #2 starter before he unexpectedly got injured and regressed in 2009 is completely inaccurate.[/quote']

 

Maybe you didn't see him as a number two, but the Yankees saw him as either as two or three (the exact number, as I mentioned in a subsequent post, is irrelevant). What is relevant is that the Yankees rotation took a major hit last year. That was my only point, and it's irrefutable.

[Imperial59]

Maybe you didn't see him as a number two' date=' but the Yankees saw him as either as two or three (the exact number, as I mentioned in a subsequent post, is irrelevant). What is relevant is that the Yankees rotation took a major hit last year. That was my only point, and it's irrefutable.[/quote']

 

They certainly took a hit. But it was the second year in a row that he was hurt and missed most of the season. It's not like the Yankees went from a healthy, legitimate #2 starter to a guy on the DL the entire season.

[yankees228]

They certainly took a hit. But it was the second year in a row that he was hurt and missed most of the season. It's not like the Yankees went from a healthy' date=' legitimate #2 starter to a guy on the DL the entire season.[/quote']

 

I was simply responding to a post that implied that the Yankees' rotation stayed healthy last year. The fact is, a guy who they were counting on to be in the top three of the rotation missed almost the entire season.

 

This is a black and white issue.

[Imperial59]

I was simply responding to a post that implied that the Yankees' rotation stayed healthy last year. The fact is, a guy who they were counting on to be in the top three of the rotation missed almost the entire season.

 

This is a black and white issue.

 

Was there actually a post saying the rotation stayed healthy all year, or did the post say the Yankees were pretty luck with injuries last year?

[yankees228]

Was there actually a post saying the rotation stayed healthy all year' date=' or did the post say the Yankees were pretty luck with injuries last year?[/quote']

 

http://www.talksox.com/forum/516198-post125.html

[kreinbihl34]

They certainly took a hit. But it was the second year in a row that he was hurt and missed most of the season. It's not like the Yankees went from a healthy' date=' legitimate #2 starter to a guy on the DL the entire season.[/quote']

 

No but they went from a guy who, just a year prior, was their second most effective picture. The Yankees were banking on Wang to return and return the same 200 IP and high 3/ low 4 ERA. That's a pretty big hole to fill. Wang had ERA+'s of 124 and 122 respectively, now I don't think the Yankees were expecting that one year removed from injury, but something slightly less wasn't out of the question. Their #3 starter was an average, 37 year old pitcher. Everyone thought Wang was fitted in the #3 slot and possibly #2 because of Burnett's injury history.

 

Whether or not you want to admit defeat, he was an important part to their staff.

[Plumpamania]

So important he wasn't offered a contract for this year.

[Dipre]

No but they went from a guy who, just a year prior, was their second most effective picture. The Yankees were banking on Wang to return and return the same 200 IP and high 3/ low 4 ERA. That's a pretty big hole to fill. Wang had ERA+'s of 124 and 122 respectively, now I don't think the Yankees were expecting that one year removed from injury, but something slightly less wasn't out of the question. Their #3 starter was an average, 37 year old pitcher. Everyone thought Wang was fitted in the #3 slot and possibly #2 because of Burnett's injury history.

 

Whether or not you want to admit defeat, he was an important part to their staff.

 

The point was never that Wang wasn't an important part of their rotation, but that he and Dice-K were each number three in their respective rotation, meaning that the blow suffered to each rotation was similar.

[kreinbihl34]

The point was never that Wang wasn't an important part of their rotation' date=' but that he and Dice-K were each number three in their respective rotation, meaning that the blow suffered to each rotation was similar.[/quote']

 

I wasn't responding to that respectively. That case and point was agreed upon. My comment was regarded to the fact Imperial didn't view Wang as healthy and somewhat to a few other posts that said he wasn't a serious #2 starter.

[Dipre]

I wasn't responding to that respectively. That case and point was agreed upon. My comment was regarded to the fact Imperial didn't view Wang as healthy and somewhat to a few other posts that said he wasn't a serious #2 starter.

 

Fair enough.

 

I just firmly believe the importance of each pitcher to their respective teams to be similar.

[Imperial59]

My comment was regarded to the fact Imperial didn't view Wang as healthy and somewhat to a few other posts that said he wasn't a serious #2 starter.

 

I think you misunderstood what I said. I said that Wang was coming off an injury shortened season and he was no longer counted on to be the team's #2 starter after the Yankees acquired AJ Burnett, who is a better pitcher. I seriously doubt the Yankees were expecting him to be the Yankees' #2 starter going into 2009.

[kreinbihl34]

I think you misunderstood what I said. I said that Wang was coming off an injury shortened season and he was no longer counted on to be the team's #2 starter after the Yankees acquired AJ Burnett' date=' who is a better pitcher. I seriously doubt the Yankees were expecting him to be the Yankees' #2 starter going into 2009.[/quote']

 

The 06 and 07 version of Wang was a really a #2. I agree that Burnett's arsenal was/is better. Though you could make a case he wasn't ever consistent, based on lack of motivation or injury... whatever. The Yankees were really taking a major risk if they, as you are saying they were, in slotting Burnett at the two hole.

 

But I can accept your point ha, no arguments here.