Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Highlifeman21
So, if you take the IBB out of the WHIP equation, I think that would bring him down to a 1.26. Still nothing to write home to mom about.
You can't take it out, though. It's all part of the fabric of his production--it at least says that his manager has no faith in his ability to retire a hitter.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Falls City Beer
You can't take it out, though. It's all part of the fabric of his production--it at least says that his manager has no faith in his ability to retire a hitter.
I realize that completely.
It was just emphasizing our echoed stance that Stanton can't be trusted to get hitters out as he approaches 40, and two managers last year thought his purpose at times was to offer 4 free ones to the hitter and put him on.
And we're paying over 2M per year for these services, aren't we?
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Highlifeman21
I realize that completely.
It was just emphasizing our echoed stance that Stanton can't be trusted to get hitters out as he approaches 40, and two managers last year thought his purpose at times was to offer 4 free ones to the hitter and put him on.
And we're paying over 2M per year for these services, aren't we?
Oh I know you understand. I was just sort re-emphasizing the point in a different way. Never mind me.
:bang:
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Willy
If you look a little deeper at those stats, 11 of his 27 walks were intentional.
16 walks in 68 innings is NOT A TON.
In fact, it's very good. A 3-1 K/W ratio.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Falls City Beer
Hey, when you can't retire a hitter...next best thing is a IBB.
That's an amazing analysis, especially coming from someone who said the following in describing Suppan's (semi) intentional walks given up in the playoffs:
"A lot of Suppan's walks have been deliberate and timely, not the result of the inability to throw strikes".
So it's intelligent for a Card to pitch around players, but it's a sign of weakness for a Red player to do so.
Double standard, favouring the Cardinals........
strange.....
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
PuffyPig
That's an amazing analysis, especially coming from someone who said the following in describing Suppan's (semi) intentional walks given up in the playoffs:
"A lot of Suppan's walks have been deliberate and timely, not the result of the inability to throw strikes".
So it's intelligent for a Card to pitch around players, but it's a sign of weakness for a Red player to do so.
Double standard, favouring the Cardinals........
strange.....
Again comparing starters and one-inning relievers. If a reliever can't come in and retire 3 hitters, what good is he?
A starter has to face a completely different set of circumstances.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
I love the Stanton aquisition for 2 reasons he is a dealable asset come play off race if we are out of it and number 2 reason is every player (alomost) that FCB runs down ends up playing well for the Red's. FCB is out if he is against it mojo the guy does well (in most cases not all).
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Topcat
I love the Stanton aquisition for 2 reasons he is a dealable asset come play off race if we are out of it and number 2 reason is every player (alomost) that FCB runs down ends up playing well for the Red's. FCB is out if he is against it mojo the guy does well (in most cases not all).
I think the contract may hinder his dealability a little come July.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
edabbs44
I think the contract may hinder his dealability a little come July.
I tend to agree, but we've seen teams get a little crazy for relief pitching in a penant race.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
I cannot understand how anybody can defend this signing. I would have "accepted" the fact that we had signed him had it been one year 1mil or even 2 years 2 mil INSTEAD of 2 year 5MILLION!?!??!?!!?
I am so perplexed by this move right now. our payroll budget is so tight right now we cannot afford to waste money on players like this when we could combine some dollars to sign a much younger and more talented FA!
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Patpacillosjock
I cannot understand how anybody can defend this signing. I would have "accepted" the fact that we had signed him had it been one year 1mil or even 2 years 2 mil INSTEAD of 2 year 5MILLION!?!??!?!!?
I am so perplexed by this move right now. our payroll budget is so tight right now we cannot afford to waste money on players like this when we could combine some dollars to sign a much younger and more talented FA!
If the payroll is so tight that 2.5 mil matters we best get out of this game. Contract us!
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Cedric
If the payroll is so tight that 2.5 mil matters we best get out of this game. Contract us!
No kidding! bottom line Red's just got at least a new 25 million dollar revenue stream thru the internet and xm satellite deal.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Topcat
I love the Stanton aquisition for 2 reasons he is a dealable asset come play off race if we are out of it and number 2 reason is every player (alomost) that FCB runs down ends up playing well for the Red's. FCB is out if he is against it mojo the guy does well (in most cases not all).
Yeah, I can only think of Phillips performing above my predictions last year.
I liked the Arroyo and Ross pickups (when very few did).
It just appears that I'm wrong a lot because I make bold predictions, so the exceptions stand out.
I'm right frighteningly often if you really check the record.
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Falls City Beer
I'm right frighteningly often if you really check the record.
Like the time you said Houston would eat The Lizzards lunch. And he struck out 12 (or something like that) and made them look like little leaguers? :laugh:
Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ltlabner
Like the time you said Houston would eat The Lizzards lunch. And he struck out 12 (or something like that) and made them look like little leaguers? :laugh:
And he had his Waterloo, what, 2 weeks later?
So I'm off by a few starts.
Big deal.