Turn Off Ads?
Page 7 of 9 FirstFirst ... 3456789 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 130

Thread: Reds sign Mike Stanton

  1. #91
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by vaticanplum View Post
    39! He is 39!!!!!
    He'll be 40 6/2 of this season. That's 40 in my book. He might start the season on the better side of 40, but he'll celebrate a birthday in-season.

    So we have him signed until he's 41, with an option for 42? This is getting better by the minute...
    Last edited by Highlifeman21; 11-20-2006 at 07:32 PM.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #92
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,701

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    You didn't give me anything. You said his being 40 was part of why he was mediocre. No, being 40 is a sign of being a good pitcher. You called him a soft tosser but gave no proof. I showed you how ludicrous that statement was. You want to include that time in Washington? Ok, 67 and 2/3 innings pitched and he had 48 K's. Soft tosser? Pitched in 82 games last year too. He's not the best signing out there but he's a good one.
    48 Ks in 68 innings sucks. Just because you have no idea how to interpret stats even when you have them on hand isn't my problem.

    48/27 K/BB ratio--that really sucks.

    Notice I didn't mention anything about his age.

  4. #93
    One and a half men Patrick Bateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,749

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    4. He doesn't strike people out (lil better than 2:1 K:BB for his career, only 855 in 1056 career IP)
    5. He blew 6 saves last year in 14 SVO. Stellar.

    While a number of your points were good, I'll have to disagree with these 2.

    855 K's in 1056 innings is an excellent K rate.

    A number of his blown saves came in a set up role, when pitchers can only blow saves, not get any. A better reflection is his 8 saves and 15 holds in 29 opportunities.

  5. #94
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,701

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Austin Kearns View Post

    855 K's in 1056 innings is an excellent K rate.
    And this was my salient point: he was once a very good reliever. The last couple of seasons + his age say he's headed down.

  6. #95
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    And this was my salient point: he was once a very good reliever. The last couple of seasons + his age say he's headed down.
    if you go look at his career and the wonderful pitchers parks he has spent them in, his reputation far exceeds his performance.
    What are you, people? On dope? - Mr Hand

  7. #96
    One and a half men Patrick Bateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,749

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Falls City Beer View Post
    48 Ks in 68 innings sucks. Just because you have no idea how to interpret stats even when you have them on hand isn't my problem.
    That translates to 6.35 K's per 9 innings.

    Other soft tossers who can't strike out guys:

    Oswalt 6.79
    Buckholz 6.13
    Hancock 5.84
    Francis 5.29
    Willis 6.44
    Hudson 5.81
    Beckett 6.94
    Zito 6.14
    E. Santana 6.22
    Holladay 5.40
    Verlander 6.00
    Garcia 5.61

  8. #97
    The Big Dog mth123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    14,560

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Not to jump in. But knowing the $ verifies for me that this move sucks.

  9. #98
    He has the Evil Eye! flyer85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    south of the border
    Posts
    23,858

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Austin Kearns View Post
    That translates to 6.35 K's per 9 innings.
    comparing relievers to starters in things like Ks and ERA is a complete non-starter.

    while pitching the majority of his career in very large pitchers parks during his 16 seasons

    ERA < 3 - 3 times(last in 2001)
    ERA between 3 and 4 - 5 times
    ERA between 4 and 5 - 7 times

    career ERA 3.81, a very average releif pitcher who probably has grealty benefited from the HR suppression of his home ballparks
    What are you, people? On dope? - Mr Hand

  10. #99
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,701

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Austin Kearns View Post
    That translates to 6.35 K's per 9 innings.

    Other soft tossers who can't strike out guys:

    Oswalt 6.79
    Buckholz 6.13
    Hancock 5.84
    Francis 5.29
    Willis 6.44
    Hudson 5.81
    Beckett 6.94
    Zito 6.14
    E. Santana 6.22
    Holladay 5.40
    Verlander 6.00
    Garcia 5.61

    You know it's a false comparison to compare relievers to starters in K/9

    By your comparison, Todd Coffey kicks Roy Oswalt's (and Stanton's) ass as a pitcher.

    A 6.35 K/9 would be acceptable if he didn't walk a soul. But he did walk a ton of people last season.

  11. #100
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    441

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    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.

  12. #101
    Mon chou Choo vaticanplum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    7,063

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Upon more careful reading of the article I'm not too happy with the signing of the sprightly 39-year-old Stanton. Maybe my hopes were too raised by the one-year, $1 million deal, but that does just seem too much for him. I'm happy to see that Gonzalez's contract is backloaded though; with Griffey's salary gone in the last year of Gonzo's contract that's a smart move and still gives me hope of spending a little more in the nearer future.
    There is no such thing as a pitching prospect.

  13. #102
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Lubbock, Texas
    Posts
    1,362

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Highlifeman21 View Post
    1. He's 40 years old
    2. He walks way too many people (27 in 68 IP last season)
    3. We wasted money on something that wasn't better than what we already in house
    4. He doesn't strike people out (lil better than 2:1 K:BB for his career, only 855 in 1056 career IP)
    5. He blew 6 saves last year in 14 SVO. Stellar.
    6. He has declining K/9 rates.
    7. That 1.40+ WHIP last year really screams 2 year deal. Above his career norm of 1.33.
    8. 1.07 G/F in 2 pitcher parks. Excellent
    9. Allowed OPS of .710 in 2006. Again, above his career norm of .692.
    10. When your numbers start going to the wrong side of your career norms, stay way the hell away, and especially at over 2M per year.
    I will say it one more time. 51st ALL TIME in K/9. 24th among active players. You said I don't know to interpret stats, I don't think you even know how to read them. If you can look at those stats and tell me he has a
    lousy K rate, then you have no credibility with me. I'll just let it go.

  14. #103
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Handofdeath View Post
    I will say it one more time. 51st ALL TIME in K/9. 24th among active players. You said I don't know to interpret stats, I don't think you even know how to read them. If you can look at those stats and tell me he has a
    lousy K rate, then you have no credibility with me. I'll just let it go.
    Actually, FCB said you don't know how to interpret stats.

    You're heralding Stanton for his career K/9. Good for him and his 51st all time ranking. What did he do in 2006? The correct answer, is diddly squat. That 1.43 WHIP he put up last year really impresses me, along with the almost 30 walks in just under 70 IP. Yeah, let's give him the ball at the same rate Narron gave Franklin the ball last year....

    But I appreciate you putting words in my mouth when it was really FCB who said you have no idea how to interpret stats.

    Please continue to defend this waste of money signing....

  15. #104
    Man Pills
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    24,701

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Willy View Post
    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.
    Hey, when you can't retire a hitter...next best thing is a IBB.

  16. #105
    Member Highlifeman21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Bristol, just around the corner from ESPN
    Posts
    8,694

    Re: Reds sign Mike Stanton

    Quote Originally Posted by Willy View Post
    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.
    Not knowing to whom he issued the free passes, two things immediately jump to mind with 11 IBB in 68 IP.

    1. He can't be trusted to attempt to get some better hitters out, thus the free pass.
    2. Why on earth is he in the game if he's just handing out free passes to 1B?

    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.


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25