madmike1 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 MadMike...some pitchers lose a little bit when they're not going from the wind up. Maybe RJ was getting enough on his pithces with nobody on but once the wind up was taken away, it took off just enough to make him terrible. I'm pretty much done with this discussion. Regardless of what Randy does this season, I say it was a great move by Cashman just to dump the salary. I honestly would have been fine with us just handing him over to the D-Backs. I think what we're seeing on this forum/thread pretty much represents how most baseball fans/experts feel about this deal. An ESPN poll had 75% stating that this was a good move by the Yanks. The overwhelming majority of fans like or love this move. That doesn't mean the majority is right, it just means many of us were able to decide from watching RJ how bad he was and we didn't need numbers that tell us otherwise. Going back to the NL could get Randy Johnson another Cy Young, who knows. But it's fair to say he didn't cut it in NY.So it made him terrible but his GF ratio was still better from the stretch? that just doesn't really jive.... You don't run teams by opinion polls. I bet 75% of "baseball experts" thought that the beckett deal was great for boston or that the pavano and vazquez deals were great for the yankees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 This isn't about the future this is about what makes the yankees a BETTER TEAM THIS YEAR. And this trade makes the yankees worse. I'm done with you. Until you realize that teams lose because they give up more runs than the other team there is no point in talking. RJ gave up a ton of runs and was SHELLED more than a dozen times last year. No matter what any other stat says, he was bad. I'm confident that whoever replaces him in the rotation will post an ERA better or at the very worst comparable to RJ at about $13 million less than what he cost. Brilliant move by Cashman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I'm done with you. Until you realize that teams lose because they give up more runs than the other team there is no point in talking. RJ gave up a ton of runs and was SHELLED more than a dozen times last year. No matter what any other stat says, he was bad. I'm confident that whoever replaces him in the rotation will post an ERA better or at the very worst comparable to RJ at about $13 million less than what he cost. Brilliant move by Cashman. You still have said nothing that disproves anything I've said. Do you really lose because you give up more runs then the other team? Do ya? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 You still have said nothing that disproves anything I've said. Do you really lose because you give up more runs then the other team? Do ya? Yes Mike, you really do. It's a fact. It might not have been mentioned in moneyball but when the other team scores more runs than you..they win. Randy Johnson gives up a lot of runs. Thats bad. I can not make it any easier for you to understand than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Yes Mike, you really do. It's a fact. It might not have been mentioned in moneyball but when the other team scores more runs than you..they win. Randy Johnson gives up a lot of runs. Thats bad. I can not make it any easier for you to understand than that. Just saying he gives up alot of runs OVER AND OVER again and how much he gets bombed OVER AND OVER again is a horrible way to argue with someone who has presented as many facts as i have in this argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Just saying he gives up alot of runs OVER AND OVER again and how much he gets bombed OVER AND OVER again is a horrible way to argue with someone who has presented as many facts as i have in this argument. Not being able to understand that a pitcher is bad if he gives up a TON of runs is mind boggling to me. I'm finished trying to help you comprehend basic common sense and what makes a pitcher good as opposed to bad. I keep brining up the number of times he was bombed becuase that's what makes him bad Mike. I'm finished with you. You've shown "stats"? What you have shown is closer to excuses that stats. He's terrible. Thank you Brian Casman for having the common sense to make this move. I hope the Yankee FO keeps up the outstanding off-season they're having. Mike, I'm done with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Not being able to understand that a pitcher is bad if he gives up a TON of runs is mind boggling to me. I'm finished trying to help you comprehend basic common sense and what makes a pitcher good as opposed to bad. I keep brining up the number of times he was bombed becuase that's what makes him bad Mike. I'm finished with you. You've shown "stats"? What you have shown is closer to excuses that stats. He's terrible. Thank you Brian Casman for having the common sense to make this move. I hope the Yankee FO keeps up the outstanding off-season they're having. Mike, I'm done with you. Whats going to be your excuse when RJ has a <3.50 season with the dbacks and the players the yankees got in the trade turn out to be worthless? That it's ALL the NL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I'm furious the Yanks and YES network didn't run a live press conference for this signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barton Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I'm furious the Yanks and YES network didn't run a live press conference for this signing. Why do you watch the YES network anyways? Wait, I know. You love those "Yankee Classic Moments" clips they show during every commercial run! hahaaha poor mets lolol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 Why do you watch the YES network anyways? Wait, I know. You love those "Yankee Classic Moments" clips they show during every commercial run! hahaaha poor mets lolol LOL...work from home so try and catch Mike and the Dog show if I am not swamped. I tell you though, one thing that suprises me is that show where Michael Kay interviews sports stars , celebrities, pop/rock stars etc is not half bad. He is actually pretty witty and talented in that venue and asks some good non typical questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugg Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 If he was in pain all year it's common sense that if that pain goes away because of the surgery he'll pitch better pain free. You can call sabermetrics BS all you want but it's still a better way of predicting future performance then subjective opinions. I understand your sabermetrics points, and they often have merit. But in this case, Mo Rivera's observations are more telling than any stats. And many of those stats are mors consistent with a guy on the downside than a good starting pitcher . On this issue, you're just wrong. He's going to be a year older, so there's no reason to think he will be any better in 2007 when he sucked in 2006. In his 2 years with the Yankees, his HRS allowed, walks and ERA are all up substantially. You can play with the numbera any way you like, but those don't change or bode well for a guy in his 40s. http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnsra05.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted January 14, 2007 Share Posted January 14, 2007 I understand your sabermetrics points, and they often have merit. But in this case, Mo Rivera's observations are more telling than any stats. And many of those stats are mors consistent with a guy on the downside than a good starting pitcher . On this issue, you're just wrong. He's going to be a year older, so there's no reason to think he will be any better in 2007 when he sucked in 2006. In his 2 years with the Yankees, his HRS allowed, walks and ERA are all up substantially. You can play with the numbera any way you like, but those don't change or bode well for a guy in his 40s. http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnsra05.shtml All valid points but he still has more value then what the yankees got for him which is my main objection to the trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 The way Johnson pitched the past 2 years, he had great luck, not bad luck. He pitched on days teh Yankees scored a ton of runs, especially in 2006. Otherwise, his record would have been more like 10-17, which is a better indicator of the way he pitched. I'm also done here. I need to talk sports with guys who comprehend, not just throw out stats as the be-all - come-all. Last year Randy Johnson had relatively poor control, threw very hittable sliders, and lacked, for the most part, a dominating fastball. He was hittable, and that is not teh Randy teh Yankees padi big bucks for. IMO, getting back a Nursing Home resident for Randywould have been a killer trade by Cashman. Subtracting Randy automatically makes the rotation better in 2007, no matter who you plug in his spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmike1 Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 IMO, getting back a Nursing Home resident for Randywould have been a killer trade by Cashman. Subtracting Randy automatically makes the rotation better in 2007, no matter who you plug in his spot. Thats just not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mbn007 Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 Thats just not true. Whatever you choose to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 The way Johnson pitched the past 2 years, he had great luck, not bad luck. He pitched on days teh Yankees scored a ton of runs, especially in 2006. Otherwise, his record would have been more like 10-17, which is a better indicator of the way he pitched. I'm also done here. I need to talk sports with guys who comprehend, not just throw out stats as the be-all - come-all. Last year Randy Johnson had relatively poor control, threw very hittable sliders, and lacked, for the most part, a dominating fastball. He was hittable, and that is not teh Randy teh Yankees padi big bucks for. IMO, getting back a Nursing Home resident for Randywould have been a killer trade by Cashman. Subtracting Randy automatically makes the rotation better in 2007, no matter who you plug in his spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 You still have said nothing that disproves anything I've said. Do you really lose because you give up more runs then the other team? Do ya? I have read this 20 times. I don't know if this is serious or a joke. Is this serious? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxman Posted January 15, 2007 Share Posted January 15, 2007 All valid points but he still has more value then what the yankees got for him which is my main objection to the trade. How can you sit from afar and judge value? Something is worth EXACTLY what someone is willing to pay for it. I worked with this guy who went on and on about his house for years. When he went to sell it he had to take 200k less than what he said it was "worth". And this is when the market was hot. Worth is a subjective thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFJF Posted January 16, 2007 Share Posted January 16, 2007 How can you sit from afar and judge value? Something is worth EXACTLY what someone is willing to pay for it. I worked with this guy who went on and on about his house for years. When he went to sell it he had to take 200k less than what he said it was "worth". And this is when the market was hot. Worth is a subjective thing. ding ding ding....we have a winner Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.