Barton Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 They are SUPPOSED to get roughed up? They are top prospects. They are NOT supposed to get destroyed like they have been this season. Sure, you can expect them to have shaky outings; all pitchers have shaky outings. But these guys were supposed to be on the level of the Lincecums and Lirianos of the world and they are clearly not. Kennedy was never on that kind of level. #3 at best. As to Hughes, I'll just say his stuff has been much worse ever since he came back from the DL after pulling his hamstring in that no hitter vs the Rangers. Seems like his mechanics are out of sorts because his fastball is flat and his curve hasnt been sharp. I read they changed up his mechanics sometime last season, after returning from the DL. Cant say I get that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeebers Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 You'd make a great GM. Giving up on young pitchers after a month. Perez was great last year, but he has been nothing but a below average to terrible pitcher his entire career otherwise. I haven't given up on anyone. My premise on the three Yankee pitchers have always been the same. I think Hughes will be good. He's got a sharp curve, and he throws 91-92 which is definitely good enough to get hitters out. But I have never seen Hughes throw 95 like he was advertised to be able to. As for Kennedy, you're wasting your time with him, his stuff is ordinary and he has to be perfect to be successful. Joba is Joba, I think they should leave him where he is, and eventually take over for Rivera. Regardless, If you look at it objectively, Perez has much better "stuff" than either Kennedy or Hughes. Again, he's wildly inconsistent that he'll never become dominant, but he will show flashes of brilliance like he did last night. My original response, was to a post that said, "Perez sucks". And there was not backed up by any logical fact other than one's opinion. Perez is only 27 relatively young, he's had 2 great years. and his BAA against has always been solid. his only issue is periods of wildness. As for Hughes, Kennedy , Igawa, the fact of the matter is they have sucked. They've not shown me anything and that really all I have to go on to this point. I think the Hughes/Kennedy combo has started 13 games or so and only one start was a quality start. If anyone says they "expected" what they've gotten from those 2, you're obviously full of **** and you are blinded by your own Yankee glasses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thai Jet Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Other than Igawa, you're about the only one. Homer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdjet Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 I will never stop being a Yankees fan. I'm just pissed that they hired the Herm Edwards of baseball and that he has led them to last place. hmm, Girardi has an engineering degree from Northwestern and is on the uptight side. Herm = buffoon who never shuts the hell up. I would love to read why you make this comparison, your man love for Torre clouding things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Posted May 20, 2008 Author Share Posted May 20, 2008 hmm, Girardi has an engineering degree from Northwestern and is on the uptight side. Herm = buffoon who never shuts the hell up. I would love to read why you make this comparison, your man love for Torre clouding things? Nope. Torre's history. I'm all about NOW. Your assessment of Girardi is a load of crap. Uptight? Ha. The guy likes to hear himself talk as much as Hermie ever did. He comes in with all this bluster about how he's going to change things, then falls flat on his face. Just like Hermie. I just hope like hell that it does not take the Yanks five years to figure out they hired a snake oil salesman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBrick Wall Posted May 20, 2008 Share Posted May 20, 2008 Homer Ask some scouts who actually know something about baseball and they'll tell you EVERY SINGLE TIME that they will take Hughes and Kennedy over Perez, especially for the future. But no, keep using an extremely SSS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Ask some scouts who actually know something about baseball and they'll tell you EVERY SINGLE TIME that they will take Hughes and Kennedy over Perez, especially for the future. But no, keep using an extremely SSS. BS. Maybe they take Hughes and probably end up correct in doing so but there has been no reason to rate Ian Kennedy above anyone for the future. Perez has better stuff than BOTH but can't seem to be consistent so Hughes gets the nod purely on potential. Ian, not even close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GimmeShelter Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 May 18th 2007: 18-22 May 18th 2008: 20-24 Big difference between managers. Do me a favor and run that math with the Marlins without Miguel Cabrera, Willis and the two young arms Girardi ruined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeebers Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Ask some scouts who actually know something about baseball and they'll tell you EVERY SINGLE TIME that they will take Hughes and Kennedy over Perez, especially for the future. But no, keep using an extremely SSS. I take it you are very tight with big league scouts. Anyway, as GS mentioned, there's a chance Hughes will be better than Perez, It wouldn't surprise me. If Hughes is half as good as the Yankee hype machine says he is, he will be better than Perez. Remember some folks here believed he was better than 95% of all big league pitchers even before he set foot on a major league mound. As for Kennedy, you're barking up the wrong tree, if anyone would take Kennedy over Perez, purely taking ability into account, they need to have their heads examined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
124 Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 Do me a favor and run that math with the Marlins without Miguel Cabrera, Willis and the two young arms Girardi ruined. 2006 Marlins and 2008 Marlins are entirely different teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaBrick Wall Posted May 21, 2008 Share Posted May 21, 2008 BS. Maybe they take Hughes and probably end up correct in doing so but there has been no reason to rate Ian Kennedy above anyone for the future. Perez has better stuff than BOTH but can't seem to be consistent so Hughes gets the nod purely on potential. Ian, not even close. Perez does not have better stuff than Hughes. Hughes has two plus fastballs and a plus-plus curveball, along with a decent changeup. He hasn't shown it yet but when everything straightens out with his injury and he gets his feet wet more he will be fine. Kennedy vs. Perez is at least debatable, but Hughes and Perez is not. Perez can never be more than a number three or four starter because he can never be consistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.