What to do with Wakefield

[FredLynn]

There was an analysis posted on another Sox board regarding pitchers who pitched very well for one year (eg: Beckett in 2007) and then had an off year or two and their chances of coming back to excel again. As it turns out, those pitchers are few and far between. I think Greg Maddux was on the list, but I can't recall who else was there. The numbers do not favor Beckett coming back and pitching well enough to justify his roughly $16M/yr salary for four years. He has also lost velocity off his fastball, and it seems to have straightened out somewhat over the years. Unfortunately, he is the key to our rotation this year. Lester and Bucky are going to be good, though probably not as good as last year. Lackey will not change much, most likely, and DiceK is a good #5 SP, ie, he sucks and whatever we get out of him is gravy.

The Yankees starting rotation once you get past CC, however, is a joke.

[ORS]

Or maybe it is because Beckett is coming off an injury plagued season where even when he was on this hill' date=' he looked absolutely terrible. Maybe that had something to do with it. Or maybe it is because the guy hasnt been able to stay healthy since 2007. Maybe that's why he's a wild card, maybe. Seriously, you are the most biased person on the site, calling out other people's bias. Hypocrite[/quote']

Cite examples, please. Otherwise, this is little more than a childish attempt to throw it back on me. And, regardless of the reason, both are famouslly inconsistent and should be regarded similarly. To suggest otherwise, which is what you are doing, is an actual example of bias.

[Dipre]

There was an analysis posted on another Sox board regarding pitchers who pitched very well for one year (eg: Beckett in 2007) and then had an off year or two and their chances of coming back to excel again. As it turns out, those pitchers are few and far between. I think Greg Maddux was on the list, but I can't recall who else was there. The numbers do not favor Beckett coming back and pitching well enough to justify his roughly $16M/yr salary for four years. He has also lost velocity off his fastball, and it seems to have straightened out somewhat over the years. Unfortunately, he is the key to our rotation this year. Lester and Bucky are going to be good, though probably not as good as last year. Lackey will not change much, most likely, and DiceK is a good #5 SP, ie, he sucks and whatever we get out of him is gravy.

The Yankees starting rotation once you get past CC, however, is a joke.

 

Beckett average velocity 2007-2009: 94.4 MPH.

 

Beckett 2010 average velocity: 93.5 MPH.

 

Beckett 2010 average velocity (August-September): 94.2 MPH.

 

Where's the dropoff?

 

And where's the evidence that his fastball has "straightened out"? Looking at his charts, his fastball movement is similar now to how it was 2007-2009.

 

Beckett's problem has always been health, and it's probably what will not allow him to live up to his contract, but everything indicates that his stuff remains roughly the same.

[Dipre]

I called Burnett a (you guessed it) WILD CARD as well. It wasnt injury with Burnett' date=' from what we know. He was cruising along until something happened. Be it the issue with the pitching coach or his wife, or whatever, something happened with him. If it persists, then he'll suck. If those problems are behind him, then I think he gets back to where he was (4ERA, 200IP). I have gone on record as saying I am optimistic about Burnett AND Beckett. But both are wild cards. I have never said anything but this, so you are once again wrong. As usual[/quote']

 

It's like arguing with a piece of paper.

 

There's a saying that goes like this: "When everyone argues that you are wrong, you are usually wrong".

 

I'm not the only one to call you out on this, because you are, as usual, creating a strawman argument, so let me break this down for you: The argument isn't whether or not you're calling them both Wild Cards, which you have done, the argument is that you have expressed your optimism on Burnett rounding back to form while presenting a million excuses of why Beckett won't. Focus on that point and that point only.

[SCM33]

It's like arguing with a piece of paper.

 

There's a saying that goes like this: "When everyone argues that you are wrong, you are usually wrong".

 

I'm not the only one to call you out on this, because you are, as usual, creating a strawman argument, so let me break this down for you: The argument isn't whether or not you're calling them both Wild Cards, which you have done, the argument is that you have expressed your optimism on Burnett rounding back to form while presenting a million excuses of why Beckett won't. Focus on that point and that point only.

 

Just call Dipre....Mariano Rivera, the closer.....this argument is over.

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

It was against Jacko. I could have told you that from the beginning.

[a700hitter]

Two sets of fans (Yankees and Red Sox) calling each other biased. Lol! Isn't that a big part of being a fan of a team?

[jacksonianmarch]

It's like arguing with a piece of paper.

 

There's a saying that goes like this: "When everyone argues that you are wrong, you are usually wrong".

 

I'm not the only one to call you out on this, because you are, as usual, creating a strawman argument, so let me break this down for you: The argument isn't whether or not you're calling them both Wild Cards, which you have done, the argument is that you have expressed your optimism on Burnett rounding back to form while presenting a million excuses of why Beckett won't. Focus on that point and that point only.

 

Once again, I think the Spanish to English translation of what you think is a strawman must be off. Secondly, I have already said that I think both pitchers will respond this season as they both have something to prove. Also, I have called both pitchers wild cards since they do both have a possibility of continuing their spiral. It wasn't me who had a menstrual cramp when I called Beckett a wild card. I've been calling them both wild cards all offseason. It's only because I questioned the mighty red sox rotation that you and our forum mascot needed to take some midol. Seriously, you both should go on the pill. It would help shorten the duration of bleeding and make the cramping less intense

[Dipre]

Nope, you simply don't know what a strawman is, and i'm kinda tired of explaining it to you.

 

On the other hand, you keep not addressing the actual point: It's not that you didn't call both pitchers wild cards (for the 1249869085058795th time) but that you've been pretty optimistic that Burnett can rebound while offering a myriad excuses of why Beckett can't.

 

Again, focus on that point. (Your last post contained yet another strawman by the way, i think your English to English translation is not very good, perhaps Wikipedia can help).

[Palodios]

What do you want him to say, that Beckett is going to have an incredible 2007-like season and win a world series mvp trophy? Beckett has been garbage for 18 straight months. This is a fact. Jacko's post was completely unbiased, and he got attacked anyway. Why are you arguing about a theory about Burnett from another thread, and then telling him HE'S not getting the point?

[Dipre]

Ahhh, the master of logical thinking strikes yet again.

 

I'm going to explain it like you're four years old:

 

Premise A: Beckett and Burnett both had s*** years in 2010.

 

Premise B: Beckett and Burnett both have, because of their respective issues, similar chances of either bouncing back or flaming out in 2011.

 

Therefore, we can conclude that saying that one has better chances than the other would probably come with an ulterior motive. Context. Reading comprehension, etc etc etc.

 

It doesn't matter where he says it, it's an issue of "par for the course" logical fallacy, one you are very adept at engaging in by the way, making your contribution (while missing the point as well) highly unsurprising. Congrats.

[Palodios]

Contribute? You've been back for what? 24 hours, and your first "contribution" is to attack a completely unbiased topic. If you want to go dig up old threads, go for it, but don't turn this one into a troll-fest because you suddenly find yourself with nothing better to do once again.

[Dipre]

First off, i'm glad to see you are so consistently keeping tabs on what i do (although it is honestly a bit creepy) but it's good to know i'm renting a space on your brain for free. Anything for free is good.

 

Second, this is not an attempt to "attack Jacko" per se, but rather point out incorrect characterizations presented in the post that sparked the discussion:

 

First off, no one has referred to the Red Sox rotation as "ironclad" everyone knows Beckett and Dice-K are basically a flip of the coin, however, what ORS was right to call him out on (funny you don't mention him anywhere but continue your vendetta against me, again, free space) is the fact that expressing optimism for Beckett is not like going after fool's gold, and the indications are there that he could go back to being a serviceable pitcher. Just like Burnett could. So why is it so difficult for that scenario to come to fruition?

 

Anyways, if you want to refer to this as trolling, then by all means do it, but it seems like your definition is incorrect because this is a legitimate topic of discussion.

 

Why doesn't Beckett have a chance at bouncing back? The velocity is there, the stuff is there, but he's a head case that has problems staying healthy, just like Burnett.

 

Anyways, i would very much appreciate it if you stopped being an annoying little prick and got off my nuts. I did not issue any personal attacks against Jacko, simply discussing the issue of bias, making your personal attack unwarranted. Go away.

[Palodios]

I've noticed you've been gone, simply because its been better here without you. And my first post was directed towards both you and ORS-- he's been on Jacko for everything lately. If the discussion is about Beckett/Burnett, I have no problem with that. But it is clearly not about the pitchers.

[ORS]

I've noticed you've been gone' date=' simply because its been better here without you. And my first post was directed towards both you and ORS-- he's been on Jacko for everything lately. If the discussion is about Beckett/Burnett, I have no problem with that. [b']But it is clearly not about the pitchers[/b].

Nonsense, my post was specifically about the pitchers, particularly about how they should be regarded similarly. I added the bit about the bias to specifically show Jacko an example of the behavior he engages in that is the root of him getting called out so often. That's not an attack, it's FYI.

 

He chose to respond with childish attacks against my manhood, which is nonsense, and another strawman. I'm not upset, but it seems the only way he can come to grips with what I posted is to consider my posts as coming from someone irrationally perturbed. If you are going to get on your soapbox about proper discourse, please direct it at the one throwing rocks.

[Dipre]

Nonsense' date=' my post was specifically about the pitchers, particularly about how they should be regarded similarly.[/b'] I added the bit about the bias to specifically show Jacko an example of the behavior he engages in that is the root of him getting called out so often. That's not an attack, it's FYI.

 

This, the "why can Burnett rebound but Beckett can't" discussion does have past iterations, but the re-mention of it is pertinent, because the way i see it, we have every reason to believe that, if healthy, he can go back to being a serviceable pitcher at the least, and i'd argue that given the fact that his velocity remained steady and his actual problem was injury, the chances of him bouncing back are pretty good. The Sox rotation isn't "ironclad" but it's not as unlikely to be very very good as Jacko has proposed several times in attempts to minimize the superiority of the Sox rotation when compared to the Yankee rotation.

[a700hitter]

Would anyone here sign either of them to their current contracts at this point in time? There is you answer to the Beckett vs. Burnett argument.

[ORS]

Once again' date=' I think the Spanish to English translation of what you think is a strawman must be off. [/quote']

From wikipedia...

 

A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

 

He's right, this is exactly what you do regularly.

[Dipre]

Would anyone here sign either of them to their current contracts at this point in time? There is you answer to the Beckett vs. Burnett argument.

 

I'd pose the question in a different way, because you could make the argument that even while healthy, contracts as big as those always carry a lot of risk with pitchers.

 

I'd say: "Would you trade for either one of them if their team kicked in some money?"

 

And i'd respond that if Beckett shows he's healthy, seeing as his problems are not mechanical and he was the receiver of some bad luck last year, i would probably trade for him over Burnett.

 

It's not because Beckett is on the Sox, but because his problem is identifiable and, if healthy, there's a good chance he could come close to at least 2009 numbers. But with Burnett, who the hell knows?

[a700hitter]

I'd pose the question in a different way, because you could make the argument that even while healthy, contracts as big as those always carry a lot of risk with pitchers.

 

I'd say: "Would you trade for either one of them if their team kicked in some money?"

 

And i'd respond that if Beckett shows he's healthy, seeing as his problems are not mechanical and he was the receiver of some bad luck last year, i would probably trade for him over Burnett.

 

It's not because Beckett is on the Sox, but because his problem is identifiable and, if healthy, there's a good chance he could come close to at least 2009 numbers. But with Burnett, who the hell knows?

I honestly don't know what is wrong with Beckett. He looks dominant for about 4 innings and then the wheels start to come off. He looks to be better conditioned this season, but the same thing is happening in Spring Training. He seems to have no stamina.

[SoxSport]

Colon looked pretty good yesterday. He looked like he even shed a few pounds over his last start.

The question is how long can he last in the season? That's the dilemma for Girardi. They'll keep him and Garcia because they have nothing after Hughes in the rotation.

 

Albers looked good for the Red Sox. He should get a spot, but Wake is really blocking those middle relievers. They have DuBrount, who will be available for a 6th starter soon, which makes Wake less critical. A pity that kid hasn't had much spring training yet. He may have lost his chance to stick.

 

I understand Albers doesn't have any options, so he may stick. He's much better than Achison. The other guy they should keep is Reyes as the 2nd left-hander, but Wake is probably blocking that.

 

The Yankees have politics, too, with their batting order. It should be Gardner-Jeter, but Cashman seems to be saying Jeter leading off. Girardi is a smart manager, and it looks like he wants Gardner-Jeter.Jeter is a perfect no.2 hitter. Pedroia, too. Ellsbury-Pedroia/Gardner-Jeter. Pretty similar 1-2.

 

Both teams have to put their best teams out there if they expect to win. No room for sentimentality.

[Dipre]

I honestly don't know what is wrong with Beckett. He looks dominant for about 4 innings and then the wheels start to come off. He looks to be better conditioned this season' date=' but the same thing is happening in Spring Training. He seems to have no stamina.[/quote']

 

It is still Spring Training though. It's the time to build up said Stamina. I'm not as worried about him as most of the people are (Mostly because the Sox don't need him to pitch like a #1 or #2 anymore), and i believe he will be put in the best position to succeed. A good season is definitely a possibility if he can bust that 4-5 inning rut IMO.