User Name

Conjecture, doctor. For all we know it could have been a freak problem.

Or he thought he could get a multi-year deal at his price by accepting arb, expecting a huge payday otherwise. We could go on theorizing all day but the truth is: We don't know.

Toronto might have signed him on a one-year deal. Seattle had interest, Baltimore had interest. Hell, Detroit could've taken the plunge instead of going full-out for Fielder.

Peripherals can be pretty, but they don't necessarily translate into results (even though they do most of the time). If/when they do, i'll eat a big plate of crow. In the meantime, he's not a sure thing.

THEY OFFERED A CONTRACT AROUND THAT SAME AMOUNT AND WERE TURNED DOWN. Ignore is for pussies.

Nice cherry-picking. He got injured last year, after a season of 173 IP. I can confidently say Pineda is not as good a bet to pitch well in 2012 as Bucholz if both are healthy, because one has pitched in the AL East, in a hitters' park, and the other in the AL West, where hitters go to die. You can gloss over this all you want, but it's reality. Take the homer glasses off. As for 2011's velocity, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know his velocity was eventually affected by his injury: If you check out his velocity charts, you'll see a sudden drop near the end of his season last season.

Don't make s*** up. My initial idea was to let Ortiz go, and sign Beltran. If you refer to "My perfect off-season" thread, you'll see that's what i was "championing for" months ago. However, given the impossibility of signing Beltran, i was all for offering Ortiz arb, and taking the picks if he left. I understood the possibility that he could have been overpaid, but getting something if he left (and it was a possibility) was more important than one or two million, which was the raise he got in the end. Cut the crap.

Pineda has pitched one year at the ML level. In Seattle. The impact of the stadium on his numbers cannot be denied until he proves otherwise.There is no "other world" until he does it consistently. He is not a sure-thing no matter how much you pat your back about it. He can be ten years younger, but until he proves he can handle the AL East (which Bucholz has already done) the point stands. For the record, Bucholz' 2010 (healthy) average fastball velocity was 94.1, Pineda's last year was 94.2. WHAT A DIFFERENCE! I have no desire to continue this conversation since it's a matter of opinion, and obviously the opinions are heavily influenced by the team one roots for. "Wait and see". However, saying that Bucholz couldn't put up #2 numbers over a full healthy season is ridiculous.

Says who? They offered 2/18 before offering arb and he turned it down. We're both theorizing here, but realistically, it was very unlikely he would have signed for 1/10. Maybe 1/13 at the least. Although i see the option of not offering arb, had he gone to greener pastures, they would have collected the picks.

He was averaging right around 6 IP a start last year. Had he not gotten injured, he would have finished the year around 190 IP. Mind you, this was an improvement over 2009 which was an improvement over 2008, which also saw improvements in K/9 and BB/9, although he had some BABIP problems (which would have probably evened out), although the HR/9 rate is a concern. The stuff is there, if the health is there, he should be able to replicate his 2011 numbers over a full season. What's the argument against it? I'll tell you what he is. He's more of a sure thing than either Nova or Pineda, two pitchers who you tout as world beaters and who have exactly a season under their belt, and one of them in Seattle. If they're "sure things" because of their youth and upside, so is Bucholz.

That's funny.

That "theoretical trade" does not apply to the situation at all. Also, how did they "Badly overpay" Ortiz? He got a two million raise, not almost five. You're obviously just busting balls here.

I have never agreed on anything with you as strongly as i agree with this. That's a stupid stupid contract.

Yup, i'm on the same boat. I gave him a B. While Jacko's trying to bust bal ls about letting Papelbon go, i think it was a good move. That would have been a stupid, stupid contract and we got a suitable replacement. Not bringing back Wakefield or Varitek, and doing it without it becoming a sideshow is a plus, as was the Ross signing, and i really like Padilla, and think he will contribute (crazy aside). He built "depth" (what we got is the definition of depth), and the club is in a position where if things break right, they will be successful, and if they don't, one or two in-season moves could fix whatever is ailing them. The Scutaro move was the breaking point for me, and that's why no higher grade was given. It makes no sense. The Ortiz thing has a lot of conjecture and reaching to it. They needed to keep him, or that was a big hole to fill, but they should have gone to battle in arbitration and give him essentially the same salary. If they are really over the salary cap though without the possibility of getting below it mid-season and don't reinforce as needed, my grade changes to a C.

I wasn't calling anyone out with the comment. Just playing devil's advocate.

Giving him the benefit of the doubt though, what if the "technicality" is actually a testing error that harmed his results?

"Getting away with murder".

Jonathan Papelbon, Jon Lester, Manny Delcarmen, Kevin Youkilis, Daniel Bard, Clay Bucholz, Jacoby Ellsbury, among others all came up or were incorporated into the roster under Tito, who got lambasted for "ruining" Craig Hansen by putting him out there too soon. Where do you come up with this stuff?

It's like they put a cup a cup of lemon juice, a crazy cat lady, and Mort from Family Guy in a blender: Out comes Muggah.