Schilling: Sign Beckett -- Now

[Imperial59]

Sure' date=' because you're exaggerating the problem. When a guy generally does the right thing, has great command and good strikeout rates, the odd brainfart of bull-headed moment doesn't make him a thrower rather than a pitcher, because 85% or more of the time the guy's doing exactly what you expect of him.[/quote']

 

If he does the right thing almost all the time, then it doesn't sound like he has much room for improvement. You can't have it both ways and say he struggles with pitch selection and if he improves it he could be an even better pitcher, then turn around and say he doesn't struggle with pitch selection and it's not an issue when he ages and his fastball slows down.

[a700hitter]

It's a pretty safe bet now' date=' but will a 35 year old pitcher with some previous shoulder damage be a safe bet? That's what I'm not sold on.[/quote']Being that he hasn't had any shoulder issues in years, I don't see it as an issue in the the Lee/Beckett discussion. Rocket had shoulder surgery early in his career, and it was never an issue as he pitched well into his 40's.

[Dojji]

You're the one trying to have it both ways, dude. It's a known fact that Beckett still has room to improve and develop his stuff if he can just pitch a bit smarter. His raw stuff is way better than Lee's, that's a fact.

 

And when we talk about room to improve, Lee peaked last year so it's not like your guy is any better a candidate to improve on past years than Beckett. So how's about you actually criticize those parts of Beckett that Lee might actually be an improvement over -- if this hasn't just become an excuse to bash Beckett in retribution because someone had the unmitigated gall to contradict you.

[Imperial59]

http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/02/09/blessing-in-disguise-mariners-not-sweating-injury-to-cliff-lee/

 

because a guy who had surgery this preseason is a much better bet to stay healthy longterm than a guy who hasn't had a shoulder problem or any other health problem bigger than a blister or a pulled muscle since he turned 21.

 

 

Oh, come on. If you think a minor foot surgery puts Lee at risk or injury in the future, then you must REALLY be sweating these injuries to Beckett:

 

Oct 3, 2009 - Back injury

Sep 5, 2008 - Right elbow injury

Apr 27, 2008 - Neck injury

Mar 24, 2007 - Back spasms

May 17, 2007 - Finger injury

 

etc...

 

Every pitcher gets minor injuries.

[Dojji]

Being that he hasn't had any shoulder issues in years' date=' I don't see it as an issue in the the Lee/Beckett discussion. Rocket had shoulder surgery early in his career, and it was never an issue as he pitched well into his 40's.[/quote']

 

Considering that Rocket had some pharmaceutical assistance at various times in his career that may not be the best example, but other "clean" power pitchers, including Curt Schilling, struggled early with injuries and went on to age well.

[Dojji]

 

Oh, come on. If you think a minor foot surgery puts Lee at risk or injury in the future, then you must REALLY be sweating these injuries to Beckett:

 

Oct 3, 2009 - Back injury

Sep 5, 2008 - Right elbow injury

Apr 27, 2008 - Neck injury

Mar 24, 2007 - Back spasms

May 17, 2007 - Finger injury

 

etc...

 

Every pitcher gets minor injuries.

 

The fact is they're both nonproblems. You drag up your irrelevant bit of injury history, I drag out mine.

 

Besides, as Chien-Ming wang proved, foot injuries can be a lot more serious than they first appear..

[Imperial59]

You're the one trying to have it both ways, dude. It's a known fact that Beckett still has room to improve and develop his stuff if he can just pitch a bit smarter. His raw stuff is way better than Lee's, that's a fact.

 

And when we talk about room to improve, Lee peaked last year so it's not like your guy is any better a candidate to improve on past years than Beckett. So how's about you actually criticize those parts of Beckett that Lee might actually be an improvement over -- if this hasn't just become an excuse to bash Beckett in retribution because someone had the unmitigated gall to contradict you.

 

Now you're claiming that I'm about to bash Beckett. Awesome.

 

Nowhere did I bash Beckett, in fact, I clearly said that I wouldn't be upset if we ended up with either pitcher. Can't we just agree to disagree about which pitcher we'd prefer and leave it at that?

[a700hitter]

Considering that Rocket had some pharmaceutical assistance at various times in his career that may not be the best example' date=' but other "clean" power pitchers, including Curt Schilling, struggled early with injuries and went on to age well.[/quote']He probably didn't take the roids until he left Boston, and he had no shoulder issues during his Boston tenure after 1985.

[Dojji]

He probably didn't take the roids until he left Boston' date=' and he had no shoulder issues during his Boston tenure after 1985.[/quote']

 

Fair enough`

[jacksonianmarch]

Dojji, Beckett has good control, but not Schilling-esque control in the strike zone. Which is exactly the difference. Schilling had an easy transition since he could paint as well as be a power pitcher. Beckett can go to the high cheese whenever he wants to because he throws it so hard, but he isnt the kind of guy to paint to a corner on a regular basis. He also can back hitters off the plate with the FB also, which gets more difficult with lack of power. As Schilling learned and adjusted to, it's difficult to keep going high in the zone when your FB is 89-90. Those unhittable pitches become homeruns. Which is exactly why a lot of power pitchers struggle with the changeover to a finesse pitcher. Which is the entire point of this argument here. If you decide not to believe this, then so be it, but you'll be ignoring a century's worth of evidence.

[Imperial59]

He probably didn't take the roids until he left Boston' date=' and he had no shoulder issues during his Boston tenure after 1985.[/quote']

 

He went on the DL with shoulder issues in 1990 but he still made 31 starts.

[Imperial59]

Dojji' date=' Beckett has good control, but not Schilling-esque control in the strike zone. Which is exactly the difference. Schilling had an easy transition since he could paint as well as be a power pitcher. Beckett can go to the high cheese whenever he wants to because he throws it so hard, but he isnt the kind of guy to paint to a corner on a regular basis. He also can back hitters off the plate with the FB also, which gets more difficult with lack of power. As Schilling learned and adjusted to, it's difficult to keep going high in the zone when your FB is 89-90. Those unhittable pitches become homeruns. Which is exactly why a lot of power pitchers struggle with the changeover to a finesse pitcher. Which is the entire point of this argument here. If you decide not to believe this, then so be it, but you'll be ignoring a century's worth of evidence.[/quote']

 

I agree, Schilling posted a K/BB of 5.50 or great five times in his career. Beckett's best single season K/BB was 5.06.

[Keeper]

http://mlb.fanhouse.com/2010/02/09/blessing-in-disguise-mariners-not-sweating-injury-to-cliff-lee/

 

because a guy who had surgery this preseason is a much better bet to stay healthy longterm than a guy who hasn't had a shoulder problem or any other health problem bigger than a blister or a pulled muscle since he turned 21.

 

Foot surgery.

[a700hitter]

He went on the DL with shoulder issues in 1990 but he still made 31 starts.

It shortened his career to age 46.

[Imperial59]

Foot surgery.

 

He was just trying to counter my "irreverent" injury history when I pointed out that Beckett tore his labrum. Don't worry though, it was just a little tear and he could always use his other arm if it becomes an issue down the road.

[Imperial59]

It shortened his career to age 46.

 

I was just fact checking. You said he never had any shoulder troubles with the Red Sox after 1985 so I looked it up and saw that he went on the DL in 1990 because of his shoulder. It's alright, you admitted that you're not actually correct 100% of the time the other week so we're not breaking any new ground here

[TheKilo]

I'd have to agree with you Kilo' date=' it's a riot [/quote']

 

You could have simply answered my question, instead you went with snark. Fact is, you, and a lot of others in this thread, are putting far too much weight on the last two seasons when saying that Lee is the better bet going forward. You ignore the dominance Beckett displays when it has mattered the most but tout Lee's postseason last year.

 

Dojji is right when he says the Sox haven't had too many dominant LHP on their team since Grove, and there is a very good reason for that. Lefties who don't strike people out do not have success at Fenway. To say Lee is the hands-down choice to be tter going forward simply isn't true nor accurate. Not for this team.

[Dojji]

I was just fact checking. You said he never had any shoulder troubles with the Red Sox after 1985 so I looked it up and saw that he went on the DL in 1990 because of his shoulder. It's alright' date=' you admitted that you're not actually correct 100% of the time the other week so we're not breaking any new ground here [/quote']

 

Get over yourself.

[Keeper]

You could have simply answered my question, instead you went with snark. Fact is, you, and a lot of others in this thread, are putting far too much weight on the last two seasons when saying that Lee is the better bet going forward. You ignore the dominance Beckett displays when it has mattered the most but tout Lee's postseason last year.

 

Dojji is right when he says the Sox haven't had too many dominant LHP on their team since Grove, and there is a very good reason for that. Lefties who don't strike people out do not have success at Fenway. To say Lee is the hands-down choice to be tter going forward simply isn't true nor accurate. Not for this team.

 

Bill Lee didn't strike people out. And Cliff Lee has a higher K/9 in his career and the last 2 seasons than Lester had in 2008. Also, Lester's K/9 went way up in 2009 from the year before, and he wasn't markedly better.

[Dojji]

Different era, and Bill Lee was a freak in a lot of ways.

 

One or two LHSP's actually succeeding over the entire history of the team does not mean LHSP's aren't at an extra disadvantage pitching in Fenway.

[Dojji]

The other thing to bear in mind about Lee is actually has a pretty severe platoon split for a SP. Righthanders hit .283/.324/.414/.734 against him.

[a700hitter]

I was just fact checking. You said he never had any shoulder troubles with the Red Sox after 1985 so I looked it up and saw that he went on the DL in 1990 because of his shoulder. It's alright' date=' you admitted that you're not actually correct 100% of the time the other week so we're not breaking any new ground here [/quote']Talk about a Pyrrhic victory. I can't believe that you wasted your time to check his health history to see if he had shoulder problems after 1985 despite the fact that he pitched until age 46 as a power pitcher and won about 350 games. I stand by my unresearched statement that his shoulder was not an issue after 1985 as he missed no significant time on account of his shoulder. By all means, research away to see if he skipped a couple of starts in other years. It doesn't take a lot of research to figure out that he didn't have many arm problems. Just check his career stats.

[Keeper]

The other thing to bear in mind about Lee is actually has a pretty severe platoon split for a SP. Righthanders hit .283/.321/.414/.734 against him.

 

Splits fluctuate from year to year. Lee held righties to .621 and lefties to .661 in 2008. In 2009, he held lefties to .583. Lester held righties to .737 and lefties to .571 in 2008. In 2009, he held righties to .649 and lefties to .717.

[Imperial59]

Talk about a Pyrrhic victory. I can't believe that you wasted your time to check his health history to see if he had shoulder problems after 1985 despite the fact that he pitched until age 46 as a power pitcher and won about 350 games. I stand by my unresearched statement that his shoulder was not an issue after 1985 as he missed no significant time on account of his shoulder. By all means' date=' research away to see if he skipped a couple of starts in other years. It doesn't take a lot of research to figure out that he didn't have many arm problems. Just check his career stats.[/quote']

 

Don't you think you should have "wasted your time" by checking his injury history yourself before you claimed that he never had a shoulder issue with the Red Sox after '85

 

As for what he did after he left the Red Sox, I could care less because he was a walking pharmacy by age 35.

[Imperial59]

You could have simply answered my question' date=' instead you went with snark. [b']Fact is, you, and a lot of others in this thread, are putting far too much weight on the last two seasons when saying that Lee is the better bet going forward. You ignore the dominance Beckett displays when it has mattered the most but tout Lee's postseason last year. [/b]

 

Dojji is right when he says the Sox haven't had too many dominant LHP on their team since Grove, and there is a very good reason for that. Lefties who don't strike people out do not have success at Fenway. To say Lee is the hands-down choice to be tter going forward simply isn't true nor accurate. Not for this team.

 

I've never once mentioned postseason performance in this thread, you must have me confused with someone else.

 

As for your other points, Lee isn't the pitcher he was in 2007. Do you judge Lester by his 2007 season too? And I reject the idea that lefties can't be successful in Fenway Park without striking out a bunch of batters. Frank Viola posted a 3.44 ERA for us in 1992 with a 4.5 K/9 and he then posted a 3.14 ERA for us the next year with a 2.6 K/9.

[Dipre]

To be honest, i'd be content with either. I just think that over the long run, it'd be easier for Lee to adjust to the wear and tear of age, but Beckett being younger by almost two years ties that up.

[Imperial59]

To be honest' date=' i'd be content with either. I just think that over the long run, it'd be easier for Lee to adjust to the wear and tear of age, but Beckett being younger by almost two years ties that up.[/quote']

 

Yeah, I'm with you. Like I said, I won't be disappointed with either one.

[Dipre]

The truth of it is, the lack of baseball is turning every little thing into a, well, baseball argument. I've never been so psyched for ST games in my life.

[BSN07]

The truth of it is' date=' the lack of baseball is turning every little thing into a, well, baseball argument. I've never been so psyched for ST games in my life.[/quote']

 

It's just that time of year

 

I personally would rather have Beckett over Lee. Lee is a good SP, don't get me wrong.I'm not saying he some scrub or anything like that. Both have their own concerns when talking long term extensions.

 

But If I had to chose one, it would be Beckett.

[Spudboy]

Talk about a Pyrrhic victory. I can't believe that you wasted your time to check his health history to see if he had shoulder problems after 1985 despite the fact that he pitched until age 46 as a power pitcher and won about 350 games. I stand by my unresearched statement that his shoulder was not an issue after 1985 as he missed no significant time on account of his shoulder. By all means' date=' research away to see if he skipped a couple of starts in other years. It doesn't take a lot of research to figure out that he didn't have many arm problems. Just check his career stats.[/quote']

 

Ahhh... Baseball fandom in the internet age.

 

I guess old timers will never understand the game anymore.