Yankees trade for Pineda

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

I know. Only' date=' I disagree about the chronic negativity being limited to this offseason. It's pretty much like this all the time.[/quote']

 

The negativity and pessimism has always been here. It just hasn't always been here in rapid-fire' date=' post-after-post frequency like it has this offseason. The offseason thread is the longest thread in the history of this board, and the majority of posts are about how ill-equiped the team is for 2012, how horrible they were in 2011, and the utter failure of the FO to put competitive team on the field, etc.,[/quote']

 

It's like a black hole that sucks in anything that might be good about being a Red Sox fan. The funny thing is that if you try to express a different point of view you're ridiculed by the negatives' date=' and if you fire back, they immediately pull out the victim card. Incredible.[/quote']

 

I'm not alone, wonderful.

[jacksonianmarch]

Greetings from Jamaica mon. Logged in from the lobby to ensure the Pineda and Kuroda deals weren't a drunken dream. They weren't!

[RedSoxfanforlife305]

Make sure you don't smoke any weed. Not sure how many brain cells you have left. Enjoy!

[example1]

Come on E1' date=' the only thing wrong with the Sox going into 2012 is fan negativity? You need to get a grip and stop scapegoating posters who are posting informed opinions that are often proved out as right.[/quote']

 

I have yet to see most of these posters proved right. 2012 will be the data for that.

 

You and iOrtiz unsurprisingly were claiming doom for the 2011 team early on. You said you wouldn't claim doom if they made the playoffs, and they missed on the last game. The only thing that matters to you is results, so you are certainly consistent, but they lost that game because Papelbon blew a save, yet he's the guy you wanted to keep regardless of the huge contract. They also lost the game because Crawford couldn't make a catch--albeit a difficult one--with the winning run coming around. You were the biggest advocate of getting Crawford last year. Most of the current posse of realists weren't here for you hyperextending your arm for the backpatting with that signing. You jumped for joy, changed your sig line, etc.,

 

I don't see that as you being "proven" right.

 

Am I ripping on you? Not at all. I just find it funny that a band of likeminded posters are suddenly acting like the last 3 years have been nothing but horrible, that the current team is s***, and that 2012 will be a rebuilding year (not your view, I grant you).

 

I'm not the only one who sees all of the vitriole as either misguided or over the top. Again, you have been consistent (and even warm) with regards to the team at times, and I've seen you be positive about them by comparison to the likes of SBF, PG, Muggah, etc., All I've seen from them is a bunch of complaining about the team, veiled insults at posters who are optimistic about the talent on the team, and, I suspect, some secret realist-handshakes going on in PM land.

 

Don't feel the need to jump to their defense. I think you are among the most realistic posters on this board, even if your realism tastes a bit sour at times.

[VA Sox Fan]

I have yet to see most of these posters proved right. 2012 will be the data for that.

 

You and iOrtiz unsurprisingly were claiming doom for the 2011 team early on. You said you wouldn't claim doom if they made the playoffs, and they missed on the last game. The only thing that matters to you is results, so you are certainly consistent, but they lost that game because Papelbon blew a save, yet he's the guy you wanted to keep regardless of the huge contract. They also lost the game because Crawford couldn't make a catch--albeit a difficult one--with the winning run coming around. You were the biggest advocate of getting Crawford last year. Most of the current posse of realists weren't here for you hyperextending your arm for the backpatting with that signing. You jumped for joy, changed your sig line, etc.,

 

I don't see that as you being "proven" right.

 

Am I ripping on you? Not at all. I just find it funny that a band of likeminded posters are suddenly acting like the last 3 years have been nothing but horrible, that the current team is s***, and that 2012 will be a rebuilding year (not your view, I grant you).

 

I'm not the only one who sees all of the vitriole as either misguided or over the top. Again, you have been consistent (and even warm) with regards to the team at times, and I've seen you be positive about them by comparison to the likes of SBF, PG, Muggah, etc., All I've seen from them is a bunch of complaining about the team, veiled insults at posters who are optimistic about the talent on the team, and, I suspect, some secret realist-handshakes going on in PM land.

 

Don't feel the need to jump to their defense. I think you are among the most realistic posters on this board, even if your realism tastes a bit sour at times.

 

Excellent points e1. The bolded part is so true. One of those posters have mentioned to me a couple of times that he could recommend a Red Sox board that would suit my positive "polyanna" attitude. I've enjoyed this board for 6 years, why would I want to go elsewhere?

[ORS]

So let me get this right ORS. I make a post about Pineda's abilities' date=' because our competitors the Yankees just got him, and you take that as an opportunity to start an argument with me about Bard who I have discussed becoming a starter before the season ended. You don't think that is being unnecessarily argumentative? It was also without any provocation. Even after your lame-ass attempt to get under my skin, I still played it off in good humor, but that was still not enough for you. You had to launch into a whine-ass festival with E1 about other posters. That's not negativity? You have problems dude.[/quote']

Can you quit it with the victim card already? I noticed what I thought to be an incongruity, potentially a double standard, in your evaluations of two very similar pitchers (by the pitches they are capable of throwing). Am I going to get labelled unnecessarily argumentative every time I notice an incongruity? For f***s sake, give it a rest.

 

I remember you being supportive of Bard being in the rotation (although only on your terms which required Papelbon to stay) in the past. However, more recent posts in other threads show no shred of optimism about Bard as a starter. None.

 

EDIT: I'm the one with problems, yet you are the one vainly looking to be insulted with everything I post. Go figure.

[a700hitter]

I have yet to see most of these posters proved right. 2012 will be the data for that.

 

You and iOrtiz unsurprisingly were claiming doom for the 2011 team early on. You said you wouldn't claim doom if they made the playoffs, and they missed on the last game. The only thing that matters to you is results, so you are certainly consistent, but they lost that game because Papelbon blew a save, yet he's the guy you wanted to keep regardless of the huge contract. They also lost the game because Crawford couldn't make a catch--albeit a difficult one--with the winning run coming around. You were the biggest advocate of getting Crawford last year. Most of the current posse of realists weren't here for you hyperextending your arm for the backpatting with that signing. You jumped for joy, changed your sig line, etc.,

 

I don't see that as you being "proven" right.

 

Am I ripping on you? Not at all. I just find it funny that a band of likeminded posters are suddenly acting like the last 3 years have been nothing but horrible, that the current team is s***, and that 2012 will be a rebuilding year (not your view, I grant you).

 

I'm not the only one who sees all of the vitriole as either misguided or over the top. Again, you have been consistent (and even warm) with regards to the team at times, and I've seen you be positive about them by comparison to the likes of SBF, PG, Muggah, etc., All I've seen from them is a bunch of complaining about the team, veiled insults at posters who are optimistic about the talent on the team, and, I suspect, some secret realist-handshakes going on in PM land.

 

Don't feel the need to jump to their defense. I think you are among the most realistic posters on this board, even if your realism tastes a bit sour at times.

Vitriole directed at who... and why does that bother you?

 

iortiz, I and others were right that the team was collapsing and needed to get pitching. We called that about September 1st. We were right that the FO and the manager and everyone in between was responsible. They are almost all gone.

 

Oh, and in August, I was right that the team was considering converting Bard to a starter in 2012.

 

We are yet to be proved right about 2012, but as I pointed out yesterday, you and the positive people agree with us that we need a starter, so I am not sure what anyone needs to be proved right in 2012, since we all seem to be in agreement.

 

The only vitriole that I see in this forum is directed by one group of posters at another. I am disappointed that you have been one of the spewers.

[a700hitter]

Can you quit it with the victim card already? I noticed what I thought to be an incongruity, potentially a double standard, in your evaluations of two very similar pitchers (by the pitches they are capable of throwing). Am I going to get labelled unnecessarily argumentative every time I notice an incongruity? For f***s sake, give it a rest.

 

I remember you being supportive of Bard being in the rotation (although only on your terms which required Papelbon to stay) in the past. However, more recent posts in other threads show no shred of optimism about Bard as a starter. None.

 

EDIT: I'm the one with problems, yet you are the one vainly looking to be insulted with everything I post. Go figure.

I caught you with your pants down about the so-called "incongruity" -- which was nothing more than one of your subtle shots that never has anything to do with the topic at hand. We were discussing the Pineda trade and you look to give me a veiled shot about Bard. I didn't take your bait, and answered in good humor. No victim here. That wasn't good enough for you that I ignored your baiting, because you can never be ignored. You and E1 went onto bash the negativity about Bard. When confronted with longstanding consistent evidence from posts back to August about me being in favor of Bard being a starter, you scream that I am playing the victim card. If you want to accuse about being negative about stuff, get your facts straight. Talk sports, stay on topic, and stop you ******** gotcha games. You are great for statistical analysis. It enlightens everyone, but recently I haven't seen much of that, but you have bitched and whined and been nasty a lot. No victim here, because if that's how you want it to be, I can be a prick with the best of them.

 

I am not optimistic about having two relievers converted to the rotation in the same season. I can't see that working. I want them to get another established starter, put Aceves back in the pen, and give Bard his shot to start. I disagree with those who want to leave Aceves in the rotation and put Bard back in the pen, so again, you are spinning and twisting the truth.

[ORS]

I caught you with your pants down about the so-called "incongruity" -- which was nothing more than one of your subtle shots that never has anything to do with the topic at hand. We were discussing the Pineda trade and you look to give me a veiled shot about Bard. I didn't take your bait, and answered in good humor. No victim here. That wasn't good enough for you that I ignored your baiting, because you can never be ignored. You and E1 went onto bash the negativity about Bard. When confronted with longstanding consistent evidence from posts back to August about me being in favor of Bard being a starter, you scream that I am playing the victim card. If you want to accuse about being negative about stuff, get your facts straight. Talk sports, stay on topic, and stop you ******** gotcha games. You are great for statistical analysis. It enlightens everyone, but recently I haven't seen much of that, but you have bitched and whined and been nasty a lot. No victim here, because if that's how you want it to be, I can be a prick with the best of them.

 

I am not optimistic about having two relievers converted to the rotation in the same season. I can't see that working. I want them to get another established starter, put Aceves back in the pen, and give Bard his shot to start. I disagree with those who want to leave Aceves in the rotation and put Bard back in the pen, so again, you are spinning and twisting the truth.

Vanity, again. It wasn't a veiled shot at you. You really have sensitivity issues. Not that you are sensitive to the feeling of others, but you are as thin skinned as they come, and you see potential insult in everything I post. You're paranoid.

[example1]

Vitriole directed at who... and why does that bother you?

 

iortiz, I and others were right that the team was collapsing and needed to get pitching. We called that about September 1st. We were right that the FO and the manager and everyone in between was responsible. They are almost all gone.

 

Oh, and in August, I was right that the team was considering converting Bard to a starter in 2012.

 

We are yet to be proved right about 2012, but as I pointed out yesterday, you and the positive people agree with us that we need a starter, so I am not sure what anyone needs to be proved right in 2012, since we all seem to be in agreement.

 

The only vitriole that I see in this forum is directed by one group of posters at another. I am disappointed that you have been one of the spewers.

 

You have blinders on. You don't see what others are writing as insulting or vitriolic because it isn't written at you. The same is probably true of what I or UN? or ORS are writing and my perspective.

[a700hitter]

1)Vanity' date=' again. It wasn't a veiled shot at you. 2)[b']You really have sensitivity issues[/b]. 3)Not that you are sensitive to the feeling of others, but 4)you are as thin skinned as they come, and you see potential insult in everything I post. 5) You're paranoid.

Should I consider any of these to be personal insults? I count 5. Yes, I am surely paranoid.

[example1]

I caught you with your pants down about the so-called "incongruity" -- which was nothing more than one of your subtle shots that never has anything to do with the topic at hand. We were discussing the Pineda trade and you look to give me a veiled shot about Bard. I didn't take your bait, and answered in good humor. No victim here. That wasn't good enough for you that I ignored your baiting, because you can never be ignored. You and E1 went onto bash the negativity about Bard. When confronted with longstanding consistent evidence from posts back to August about me being in favor of Bard being a starter, you scream that I am playing the victim card. If you want to accuse about being negative about stuff, get your facts straight. Talk sports, stay on topic, and stop you ******** gotcha games. You are great for statistical analysis. It enlightens everyone, but recently I haven't seen much of that, but you have bitched and whined and been nasty a lot. No victim here, because if that's how you want it to be, I can be a prick with the best of them.

 

I am not optimistic about having two relievers converted to the rotation in the same season. I can't see that working. I want them to get another established starter, put Aceves back in the pen, and give Bard his shot to start. I disagree with those who want to leave Aceves in the rotation and put Bard back in the pen, so again, you are spinning and twisting the truth.

 

If you are in favor of Bard as a starter, then why doesn't he make the list of "reasons the pitching could be improved in 2012" that you were demanding so clearly the past week or so? It's obvious to me that someone with his arm pitching twice the innings and taking starts that were previously taken by Wakefield is a likely improvement, even if he's a bit rusty or unpolished. Where was that with all of the demands for clearly articulated arguments by others?

 

And please don't say "because they also lost Papelbon and Bard from the pen". They have added two solid bullpen pieces and a SP is worth more than a RP 9 times out of 10. If Bard is as good as, say, Buchholz, then it will be a net positive without even accounting for Melancon and Bailey.

[ORS]

Should I consider any of these to be personal insults? I count 5. Yes' date=' I am surely paranoid.[/quote']

Consider them as whatever you want. I'm pretty sure we've gotten to the point where you'll take my silence as an insult.

[a700hitter]

You have blinders on. You don't see what others are writing as insulting or vitriolic because it isn't written at you. The same is probably true of what I or UN? or ORS are writing and my perspective.

I see it It is mainly directed at the team, the FO etc, but it is mainly not at other posters, and when it is at other posters, it is rarely personal or unprovoked. When posters have gotten into it with UN, I have cautioned them not to play that game. We have no control over what others say, but we can do better, and I am trying.

[a700hitter]

Consider them as whatever you want. I'm pretty sure we've gotten to the point where you'll take my silence as an insult.

Honestly, I will not.

 

BTW, I will call you on your cute little barbs at others too. You have been playing that cute little game for too long. I must admit that you are usually excellent at it, but yesterday and today, you stuck both feet in your mouth.

[ORS]

Honestly, I will not.

 

BTW, I will call you on your cute little barbs at others too. You have been playing that cute little game for too long. I must admit that you are usually excellent at it, but yesterday and today, you stuck both feet in your mouth.

This would be interesting, and worthy of discussion, if it was actually what I was doing. When have I ever shied from admitting my intent? I haven't. I've told you in the past when I was taking shots at you. I would tell you now if I was.

 

And, I'm not the only one who noticed this incongruity. E1 noticed it too. His point about how you have ignored Bard in our discussions about the pitching projections for 2012 is right on the point. As I said, I acknowledge your past comments in favor of trying Bard in the rotation. But, as you even mentioned, you had a caveat, that Papelbon was kept as the closer, that has not been met. Since then, your commentary about the 2012 pitching has focussed primarily on what the loss of Bard will mean for the bullpen.

 

Then, you made a comment about "loving" to see someone with specific talents in the rotation. I was genuinely curious about how you currently felt, after all that has transpired, with a player with similar talents being in the Sox rotation. No "gotcha", just an attempt to get you to talk about the potential positives from this move. You took it totally out of context.

[User Name]

The victim card is so awesome. I make posts trying to convey things in a positive light because, honestly, that's how i see some things, i am ridiculed for it and i'm the bad guy.

 

a700 needs to get a grip and get over his superiority complex, and so does the rest of his posse mind you.

 

"Poven right, proven right, proven right" STFU. If you consistently spout negative opinions about everything, you're bound to hit the nail on the head in regards to something.

[a700hitter]

This would be interesting, and worthy of discussion, if it was actually what I was doing. When have I ever shied from admitting my intent? I haven't. I've told you in the past when I was taking shots at you. I would tell you now if I was.

 

And, I'm not the only one who noticed this incongruity. E1 noticed it too. His point about how you have ignored Bard in our discussions about the pitching projections for 2012 is right on the point. As I said, I acknowledge your past comments in favor of trying Bard in the rotation. But, as you even mentioned, you had a caveat, that Papelbon was kept as the closer, that has not been met. Since then, your commentary about the 2012 pitching has focussed primarily on what the loss of Bard will mean for the bullpen.

What projections? Are there such projections? Who is stating them here, and do they have any validity at all? We don't know what he will do as a starter, but we know what h was as a reliever, and that spot has not been filled. I have a lot of hope for him as a starter as you can see from my consistent posts beginning before the season has ended. Do I acknowledge the gaping hole left in the bullpen? Yes, only an idiot wouldn't notice that. Back in the earlier thread

 

Then' date=' you made a comment about "loving" to see someone with specific talents in the rotation. I was genuinely curious about how you currently felt, after all that has transpired, with a player with similar talents being in the Sox rotation. No "gotcha", just an attempt to get you to talk about the potential positives from this move. You took it totally out of context.[/quote']You were the one that took things out of context. We have an opening in the rotation. I said that i wouldn't mind having Pineda in the rotation. That has nothing to do with Bard, and it is not an incongruity in the slightest. If you think that it is, then you don't understand how to use the word.

[ORS]

You were the one that took things out of context. We have an opening in the rotation. I said that i wouldn't mind having Pineda in the rotation. That has nothing to do with Bard, and it is not an incongruity in the slightest. If you think that it is, then you don't understand how to use the word.

Sure, I do. It means an inconsistency. Your thoughts about having Pineda in the rotation, love was the word, are not consistent with your current outlook on the rotation, where you consistently talk about having only 3 credible pitchers and make no positive mention of the player with a skillset similar to the one you "love". That's an incongruity.

[a700hitter]

Sure' date=' I do. It means an inconsistency. Your thoughts about having Pineda in the rotation, love was the word, are not consistent with your current outlook on the rotation, where you consistently talk about having only 3 credible pitchers and make no positive mention of the player with a skillset similar to the one you "love". That's an incongruity.[/quote']Still no incongruity. Bard is not and never has been a major league starter. We can hope all we want, and I am one of the first here to discuss him being a starter, but no one know how this will turn out. Is it reasonable to believe that he is solid? Yes, is it similarly reasonable to fear that he can't do it? Sure. He has not been successful as a starter at any level of pro ball. In fact, he did terrible in the low minors and almost washed out his career. He has great stuff, but as a starter he is unproved. Saying that I like Pineda is not at all incongruous with my opinion about Bard. Furthermore, even if I had been negative about Bard (which I have not), I could not be incongruous, because one is a starter that has been successful at every level of pro ball, and the other has only had success as a reliever. They are not comparable at this time.

[diony]

Pineda?s FIP was lower on the road that at home (3.26 vs 3.62 FIP).

[Palodios]

Pineda?s FIP was lower on the road that at home (3.26 vs 3.62 FIP).

 

Right, but that is because he gave up significantly fewer hits at Safeco than at other parks.

[User Name]

FIP does not factor in hits allowed.

[Station 13]

FIP does not factor in hits allowed.

 

it does, HR.

[User Name]

it does' date=' HR.[/quote']

 

That's one type of "hit".

 

When i spoke of hits allowed, i meant H/9. Because if we go down that road, he allowed the same number of HR's at home and on the road in a similar amount of innings.

[Palodios]

FIP does not factor in hits allowed.

 

Right, that's why his FIP is lower on the road, because the difference in the quality of his starts-- hits allowed in that huge park-- does not factor into the stat. Sorry if I was unclear.

[User Name]

Right' date=' that's why his FIP is lower on the road, because the difference in the quality of his starts-- hits allowed in that huge park-- does not factor into the stat. Sorry if I was unclear.[/quote']

 

He had a lower FIP on the road because the statistics that are counted in the FIP calculation (BB, IBB, HR, HBP) were essentially identical at both home and the road even though he pitched more innings on the road.

[jacksonianmarch]

Now that I have a clear mind, for now, let me sum this up. Pineda is a 22 yr old, humongous framed pitched with plus command of a power fastball, a knockout curve and an above average change. He had a stellar rookie season but seemed to tire out at seasons end. He threw 170IP last yr and should be on pace for 200. If he continues to show improvement, then he could supplant CC as Yankees ace over time. It remains to be seen how he'll adjust to the AL East and the pressures of NY. There is nothing saying he'll be immune or succumb to them. He's a he'll of a talent and as a Yankee fan, I look forward to seeing how this plays out in the spring. Alright, email and the net checked for the day, time for the pool bar!

[jacksonianmarch]

Pineda shut down indefinitely due to residual shoulder weakness. He's due to get a MR arthrogram to determine if there is something amiss in the shoulder that the MRI didnt see. If that is cleared, he won't pick up a ball for a month or more then slowly work his way back in. He's not expected to pitch in the bigs until after the ASB if everything goes well.

 

That means we should start using some of the depth we've built up in the upper minors.

[mvp 78]

A #3? Did u see his #'s? Really??

 

Inconceivable!