![]() |
|
|
#1 | |
|
15 game winner
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Sultanes de Monterrey
Posts: 4,172
|
So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
The majority opinion here (mine included) was that Leake would start in Louisville instead of stay in Cincinnati and go to the pen if the spring played out the way it was expected. Looks like that wasn't the case. From John Fay:
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
I'm back... and forth
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,605
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
I really don't think Dusty is telling the truth here, unless he was going to be the long man. There was no way he was going to be in the rotation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Lime in da Coconut
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Rainelle, WV
Posts: 7,711
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
IMHO, and that and $3 will get you a Starbuck's coffee, I think that Dusty was telling the truth. Down deep, I think he knew that one of the chosen ones (Volquez, Cueto, Bailey) would have problems and Leake would be needed in one capacity or another. As it turns out, he was right when Arroyo came down with mono, Cueto and Bailey got hurt, and it was up to Leake to start. I think Leake will be around long after Bailey and Volquez are only fond memories. He reminds me of Greg Maddux. And that isn't bad.
__________________
www.ris-news.com "The price of seeking to force our beliefs on others is that someday they might force their beliefs on us." Mario Cuomo "You only have to bat a thousand in two things; flying and heart transplants. Everything else you can go 4-for-5." -Beano Cook |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Socratic Gadfly
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,224
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Quote:
Remember that Jocketty said that the plan was to limit Leake's innings this year. Leake as the long man does just that.
__________________
"Imagination is more important than knowledge." -- Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
The Boss
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 30,696
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Leake as the long man however means you have to limit his innings next year too. And the year after.
__________________
www.redsminorleagues.com |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Hoping to be 75769013
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Dayton
Posts: 6,099
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Quote:
Dusty specifically said he was would make the team, not the rotation. He would have said rotation if that was the case.
__________________
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them. - Albert Einstein |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
#TheReturn
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 23,659
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Leake as the long man honestly makes zero sense. It just doesn't. I just do not see how Dusty is telling the truth here. Although it doesn't really matter at this point. Leake is pitching, and if he pitches well I think Homer is going to be hard pressed to have a spot in the rotation when he gets healthy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Making sense of it all
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 26,130
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Why would Dusty come out and say that Leake was going to AAA??
I think he deserves some credit....he pushes the right buttons. He proved it last season.
__________________
An excited shade of Red
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 8,627
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
#TheReturn
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Northern Illinois
Posts: 23,659
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Quote:
I also think Bailey would be a nice addition to the bullpen. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
What Me Worry?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Bellefontaine, Ohio
Posts: 26,416
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
I still think it's nice to have these options available. Here we have two of our rotation guys (Cueto, Bailey) DL'd, a #1 pitcher struggling with mono, and you got kids like Woods, Leake, and even LeCure, ready to step in.
__________________
"panic" only comes from having real expectations |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Senor Votto
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,847
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
Maybe Dusty was trying to boost his confidence?
__________________
Most Vottomatic Player |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Lets Go 'Bird' Hunting
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The University of Akron
Posts: 1,105
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
I love Leake!
__________________
Hey Sparky! Indian Hill English teachers taught me everything I know! Numbers behind the Debate: Small Ball vs. Long Ball |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 9,228
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
I said it during the whole Wood vs Leake debate. The Reds love the "never been in the minors" story line.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Box of Frogs
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: NJ
Posts: 15,816
|
Re: So, Mike Leake wasn't in danger after all
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
|
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. |