iortiz

ERA estimators work fine in the long run, not that good in the short, specially since the guys behind the pitcher in the short run (ex. current season) will always be there for good or for bad. Also you have to take era estimators with a grain of salt since first off it is recommendable to evaluate several era estimators and see which one fits better for a certain pitcher. The answer is not at era estimators. Our situation is pretty simple actually, the talent out there is not good enough to turn the ship around, we need to do something and quickly or things could take out of the hands very early.

Couldn't catch the game. Seems like pitching still not good but now the offense seems to be anemic. I would call it the perfect storm.

It's going to be hard to win this but there's still time.

1. It's not about how many but the number. 2. There's a reason FG puts this chart, the same guys who calculate WAR every year (it is not my chart LOL!) . Sure year after year every single chart for every single metric change, but in this case, this represent pretty well a large sample to judge a player in terms of WAR, reason why it is called a good rule of thumb. If you are going to base a profile on a short sample and/or number of pitchers achieving certain number, I don't think you will find the answer you are looking for. This is why I think you are the only one around here who thinks that he is already a No. 2.

I could say the same in almost every thread but I don't take it that serious. Also that comment is related to this game. I do not see a big deal spud.

Not sure, didn't bet in that game. My guess it was around -150 for NY.

Did the comment bother you?

Overs should be a safe bet, but I need to see the line. Probably it will be around 10.

Well, if this keeps going this way, Offesen and pitching sucking, there will be one and only one responsible for this mess; the one who assembled the team and probably the strategy specially regarding pitching will change going forward.

After his TJ and 2013 performance, I said, at least we are going to get a couple of good years from Lacke after all those bad years here. Then he was traded and I said Whata f***? It's funny, I miss Lackey these days. haha.

I'm going to quote some from my pal A700; a discussion with him is considered whining, bitching, make no sense, reading comp problems, etc. etc. etc... if you disagree with him. He is always obnoxious and belligerent, so be careful.

I think MVP is trolling.... For nth time, should we call it fact? LOL!

I already shared you the chart several times.

I'm not sure Kim, I have to check out but I think almost all teams have one who at least proved being one (recently/constantly) and have the potential of keep doing that, or an arm who has the stuff to become one. Unfortunately I do not see that profile in this team.

Sorry Kim, it is not my standard. Porcello is not a no. 2 by any means... Not yet. Look at FG chart. He is nothing but a "solid" arm, not even a good one. Again you are mixing oranges with apples... and pears. 1. Your sample is too short. 2. A top 60 doesn't make you a very good pitcher (No. 2). 3. A very good pitcher doesn't depends that much on his defense, since well, he can get outs by himself. Nevertheless, If you think that he is already a No. 2, it's fine Kim, but I think you are the only one.

I do not see teams drinking that Kool aid, sorry, paying 20 M for No. 3s in the mid-term.

What else could go worse?

Yup, another failure will make very difficult to keep his job. He hasn't learned how to build a pitching staff, still time, but right now is not encouraging.

Was a matter of time.

I think it has been a very interesting debate and we can agree or disagree, but as long as I recall all has been about baseball. This is exactly how the s*** up starts.

This is why I think you don't understand how time value of money and cash flow works. BTW other than you, no one is whinning. It is not an insult.

Cherington?

Yup since the other guys are mediocre.

Aside Kim, Most of the members think that Porcello is a #3, although he had a #4/5 role with the Tigers. Just for the record. I wouldn't be against Porcello if he were supposed to fill a #3 role at the right price. IMO the Sox have bet a lot hoping that this guy could climb 1 or 2 steps upstairs while taxing him some pressure to a guy who has never been in that role. Sure, they have their reasons (young, defense, etc), but in the end his profile suggests me that he will always depend from the guys behind him, reason why I think he will stay at best on what his track record suggests. Anyways, as I said in the offseason, I would have used Panda, Porcello (wouldn't make him an extension like that) and HR money to assemble a rotation like this: Lester Shields Porcello Masterson Buch, and/or whoever else you want. Betts Pedroia Papi Napoli Vic XB Castillo WM Vasquez Sure the offense doesn't look as good as it is right now, but rounding them with some good utility players and prospects like Holt, Nava, etc could have been good enough to score above AVG. Anyways, let's see if FOs's strategy works out.

I want to see JBJ in RS uniform again. At least give him one more chance.